Christopher
Member
Teh Hamburglar said:
How could you hate Beth dude? she was hoooot.
Plus she came to support Rob, he's the one who slept with her and never called her back, she probably brought the dude because it would be awkward to come alone.
-
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!*
- Thread starter Blablurn
- Start date
- Status
How could you hate Beth dude? she was hoooot.
Plus she came to support Rob, he's the one who slept with her and never called her back, she probably brought the dude because it would be awkward to come alone.
Buttonbasher
Member
http://movies.ign.com/articles/847/847350p1.html
Whoa!
Whoa!
The monster is a baby? Newborn? Going through separation anxiety! What the heck does the mom look like?
I mean, honestly, do some of you guys not have any friends that you really care about, or have you never loved someone so much you'd give up everything for them, without so much as a thought?Prime crotch said:
Rob repeatedly told his friends he'd go it alone, and they repeatedly said no way, because, shock and awe coming, that's how some of us act and treat our friends/loved ones. I have numerous buddies who I'd follow to near certain death to try to save someone they loved, and there are no less than 5 women in my life who I'd run through hell and back to try to save if I could. I'm no hero and I'd prefer not to die, but if my death meant they'd live, there's no question for me.
If you don't have any of that, I feel sorry for you. I honestly can't fathom how some people have a problem with this aspect of the film.
AdventureRacing
Member
LevelNth said:
Well you can say that now but the real question is when you are getting chased by a big fucking monster which is ripping your city to pieces would you still go back? Of course you'll say yes but i truly doubt there are many people who would go back. Personally i have no idea if i would, i would like to think that but i can't be sure.
Not to mention it's not like your donating an organ to save there life. There is no certainty here. In fact by going back your just ensuring that you and your friends will die with about .000001% of saving your other friend.
Buttonbasher
Member
Thats basically what Reeves says in that video, yes.Tr4nce said:
Got back from this a little bit ago, I'd say it was worth the ticket price. It isn't a bad movie and it isn't a great movie. It also isn't like very many other movies.
**Writing with no mercy: SPOILER WARNING**
It started out slow but the opening scene served its purpose. The party scene was really well done I thought and the little things like the person recording Rob getting surprised on their cellphone added a nice touch to the movie.
Characters were nothing special but I think that was sort of the point, average people dealing with a terrible situation. I actually felt bad when they died, but I also was there with a gal so maybe that triggered my human emotions, who knows.
The monster was cool, looked like a raptor in a couple of scenes which almost made me LOL because I couldn't stop thinking about the raptorrave.gif. Not getting a good look at it really helped you pay attention in hopes of getting another glimpse of it. The little bug things were interesting but their "bite" was lame. Oh well, helped get rid of the only character i really wanted to see die. You know, the one that looked like a meth addict.
The ending was good. I don't believe most people will like it just as most people would have like the book ending to I AM LEGEND but I think it makes more sense.
/
**Writing with no mercy: SPOILER WARNING**
It started out slow but the opening scene served its purpose. The party scene was really well done I thought and the little things like the person recording Rob getting surprised on their cellphone added a nice touch to the movie.
Characters were nothing special but I think that was sort of the point, average people dealing with a terrible situation. I actually felt bad when they died, but I also was there with a gal so maybe that triggered my human emotions, who knows.
The monster was cool, looked like a raptor in a couple of scenes which almost made me LOL because I couldn't stop thinking about the raptorrave.gif. Not getting a good look at it really helped you pay attention in hopes of getting another glimpse of it. The little bug things were interesting but their "bite" was lame. Oh well, helped get rid of the only character i really wanted to see die. You know, the one that looked like a meth addict.
The ending was good. I don't believe most people will like it just as most people would have like the book ending to I AM LEGEND but I think it makes more sense.
/
GenericPseudonym
Banned
AdventureRacing said:
Don't bother, every once in a while someone questions why Rob was such an idiot and why his friends just went along. There will always be some stupid poster who will pull some "true love" shit and call you callous or uncaring.
LowParry
Member
Greatness Gone
Member
Don't know about you bitches, but I loved Marlena.
Buttonbasher
Member
Yeah, they had a whole contest for people to make Slusho ads. Instead of linking to one of the 5 winners (who won slusho branded Alienware laptops) I will link to one that I worked on.CcrooK said:
I provided the music (basic Garage Band loops) for my pals commercial.
http://blip.tv/file/580919/
He didn't even get runners up. Oh well, he was planning on selling the prize anyway. :lol
Clover isCrushed said:
"Anonymous"
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Barkley's Justice said:
HEY GAF!!! Where is this extra Cloverfield material at?!
Buttonbasher
Member
What do you mean? If you mean the viral stuff: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9143003&postcount=314mckmas8808 said:
If you mean bonus material, I can't give you that yet even though I've been working for Paramount viral marketing this movie. It's something we're saving for the Betamax release.
Mike Works
Member
I thought Citizen Kane was a terrible movie, it was nothing but a black screen.GenericPseudonym said:
Granted I did have my eyes closed the entire time I watched the movie.
BUT THAT'S THE DIRECTOR'S FAULT
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
MThanded said:
WOAH!!! Who is that in you avi?
Mike Works
Member
spoilerish question for the thing that happens near the end of the movie that most people don't notice:
random question #2: where does the name 'cloverfield' come from? why was the monster nicknamed clover? is it a NY related nickname or something?
PS: i hate this movie because they didn't say where the monster came from is the new i hate this movie because they didn't explain what caused people to stop having children in children of men as things that people say about movies mike really liked that pisses mike off
so it's apparently a satellite (owned by the parent company of the slusho corporation) that drops down into the ocean, and it allegedly hits the monster which pisses him off and causes him to surface, according to ARG speculation. so here's my question:
why the hell did the satellite crash down to earth? there has to be an answer for that, as there's no way that it was convenient enough that their (parent company) satellite happened to crash, and it just so happened to crash right into the monster.
has their been any speculation as to why the satellite crashed (into the monster, if that is the case)?
why the hell did the satellite crash down to earth? there has to be an answer for that, as there's no way that it was convenient enough that their (parent company) satellite happened to crash, and it just so happened to crash right into the monster.
has their been any speculation as to why the satellite crashed (into the monster, if that is the case)?
random question #2: where does the name 'cloverfield' come from? why was the monster nicknamed clover? is it a NY related nickname or something?
PS: i hate this movie because they didn't say where the monster came from is the new i hate this movie because they didn't explain what caused people to stop having children in children of men as things that people say about movies mike really liked that pisses mike off
Mike Works said:
It's not a satellite from the parent company.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=9425459#post9425459
It's nearly invincible, there could be more than one, and something fell from the sky (not a nuke because there wouldn't be a camera to retrieve). Also it spawns cute little Cloverlets at will.
I'm thinking Earth Defense Force 2: Operation Cloverfield...
It's a great idea; argree with me!
I'm thinking Earth Defense Force 2: Operation Cloverfield...
It's a great idea; argree with me!
sixteen-bit
Member
It is a Great idea.Brannon said:
EDF! EDF!
Len Dontree
Animator. Respect knuckles.
Tr4nce said:
This is true. His production offices are on Cloverfield.
forgeforsaken
Member
Heh, I did this photoshop yesterday for a different forum. Spoilers as it's the cell phone pic of the monster.Brannon said:
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c345/forgeforsaken/edfvsclover.jpg
Linked as opposed to putting the image inline for spoiler reasons.
Just watched it this afternoon and I gotta say, I didn't like it.
I've intentionally avoided this thread so that nothing would be spoiled until I actually saw the film. To that end, anyone who reads the titles of this thread should be prepared for spoilers. So I don't think spoiler tags are necessary.
Going in, I was worried that this would just be another "Godzilla takes Manhattan" movie and that's exactly what it was, with a yuppie party tacked on at the beginning. The monster was okay looking. The scene of military attacking it from the perspective of a civilian hiding under a car was awesome, as was the Stealth Bomber run.
After skimming a couple dozen pages in this thread, I gotta say that I like the movie even less for trying to tell most of the story in internet marketing videos and websites. The shaky cam thing is over-kill for a full length movie, IMO. I know it was used for "realism" but if we're supposed to be seeing file footage then the movie should have been a collage of security cameras, cell-phone cams, professional news crews and the footage from this one particular camera. It would have gone a long way toward realism, with a lot less motion sickness.
The characters weren't engaging at all. We are meant to believe that a guy who was about to turn his back on everyone he knows in New York to go work in Japan suddenly decides to go into the path of devastation for a chick who showed up to his farewell party with another guy. I don't buy it. Maybe, if we saw early on that he's the hero type (perhaps by him saving someone in that first store they hide in), but that doesn't happen. They establish that the camera guy is a moron and love sick over a girl who doesn't know he's alive. This same girl suddenly goes out of her way to save his life and he doesn't even bother to put the camera down when she's being dragged away by the military? Again, I don't buy any of it.
Kudos to the people who made this movie, for breaking with convention and making something different. However, the execution was very flawed and generally left me unimpressed. I believe a movie is supposed to be so engaging that an audience can't look away for a moment. This film, forced me to look away and focus my attention on the reality of the theater, to avoid getting dizzy or nauseous.
I've intentionally avoided this thread so that nothing would be spoiled until I actually saw the film. To that end, anyone who reads the titles of this thread should be prepared for spoilers. So I don't think spoiler tags are necessary.
Going in, I was worried that this would just be another "Godzilla takes Manhattan" movie and that's exactly what it was, with a yuppie party tacked on at the beginning. The monster was okay looking. The scene of military attacking it from the perspective of a civilian hiding under a car was awesome, as was the Stealth Bomber run.
After skimming a couple dozen pages in this thread, I gotta say that I like the movie even less for trying to tell most of the story in internet marketing videos and websites. The shaky cam thing is over-kill for a full length movie, IMO. I know it was used for "realism" but if we're supposed to be seeing file footage then the movie should have been a collage of security cameras, cell-phone cams, professional news crews and the footage from this one particular camera. It would have gone a long way toward realism, with a lot less motion sickness.
The characters weren't engaging at all. We are meant to believe that a guy who was about to turn his back on everyone he knows in New York to go work in Japan suddenly decides to go into the path of devastation for a chick who showed up to his farewell party with another guy. I don't buy it. Maybe, if we saw early on that he's the hero type (perhaps by him saving someone in that first store they hide in), but that doesn't happen. They establish that the camera guy is a moron and love sick over a girl who doesn't know he's alive. This same girl suddenly goes out of her way to save his life and he doesn't even bother to put the camera down when she's being dragged away by the military? Again, I don't buy any of it.
Kudos to the people who made this movie, for breaking with convention and making something different. However, the execution was very flawed and generally left me unimpressed. I believe a movie is supposed to be so engaging that an audience can't look away for a moment. This film, forced me to look away and focus my attention on the reality of the theater, to avoid getting dizzy or nauseous.
Buttonbasher
Member
Mike Works said:
1) Not the satellite. It was someones theory but it's been passed off as fact. Just as one of my theories could have been. It's something probably connected with the monster, without being the monster itself, mainly because of water depth relating to size. Bringing in the ARG stuff, it was also far out into the ocean killing an oil station and some boats. We know the monster is
a newborn. It has some features that weren't even shown in the movie (See: human sucking underbelly.
2) In Universe: The government case that the event is filed under is called Cloverfield. The government has codenamed stuff with odd names before...
In Reality: Cloverfield was just a codename for the film, just like: Slusho, Cheese, Chocolate Outrage, etc. Then they were planning on calling in "Monsterous" and printed up a bunch of posters to reveal this at Comic Con, but an early photo of one of the posters showed up online, and people freaked out. They quickly printed 3 other posters with phrases like "Terrifying", "Furious", and the blank one. So with those names all out of the running, they came up with: Greyshot, which is the name of the
Bridge Rob and Beth at under at the end of the movie.
Buttonbasher
Member
The thing is, it's really not another Godzilla Takes Manhattan thing. Sure it all boils down to a monster attacking the city, but the two differ greatly. One's about a monster destroying a town, and people you don't really know nor care about. This took the opposite approach. It sounds by what you mention that you weren't really worrying that it would be another Godzilla takes Manhattan movie, but instead you were hoping for it. If you really were worried that it would be that type, I would think you probably got your wish.K0NY said:
The viral stuff is there to create hype. Sure it might help explain some stuff but it hardly tells most of the story. Keep in mind that the viral stuff wasn't even originally planned. The movie was written the way it was with no extra knowledge. It's not like they took the movie and decided to cut out parts to put online.
As for a collage, there wouldn't be enough of a story. It would turn into a typical "Godzilla takes Manhattan" type movie, to borrow your phrase. The movie's main character would be the monster. Sure you could have short random accounts of other people, but it would all boil down to the monster being the focus, not the people. I wouldn't have liked a movie like that, because I've seen countless Godzilla movies, and it gets stale. To see a different approach, where the monster takes sort of a back seat, was a fresh change of pace. The movie wouldn't have had much of any buzz if it weren't for the change of view.
Again, it's not like they just met. People have hit it pretty well by saying that in a day and age like this if something like this happened you would want to be with your loved ones. Rob loved Beth, and once she called him he knew she still cared and loved him. Love can make you do some crazy things. During 9/11 people did all they could to get to their loved ones, granted the situations differ. The idea is there though.
You can see the struggle of people holding him back, and the motions are far from steady camera on her during this scene.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just sharing my opinion with yours.
Mike Works
Member
Mike Works said:
thanks for the answers, but reading comprehension ftlButtonbasher said:
topsyturvy
Member
so basically you're comparing a movie like children of men to this dribble?Mike Works said:thanks for the answers, but reading comprehension ftl
TemplaerDude
Member
topsyturvy said:
noooooo... he's comparing similar aspects of it... might want to learn how to read...
Buttonbasher
Member
Yeah, I guess I went into auto pilot...:lolMike Works said:thanks for the answers, but reading comprehension ftl
Almost every Godzilla movie I can remember had several characters which were followed throughout the film. Sure, there were the rubber suit battles, but there was always a girl and her professor brother or something that were directly involved in the attack and looking for ways to stop it, etc. Even the NY Godzilla followed Matthew Broderick's adventures. (interesting fact: IMDB lists three times as many names for the cast of Godzilla [1998] as Cloverfield) So I'm pretty sure that following people around the attacked city isn't a new concept.Buttonbasher said:
We'll have to disagree. The movie shows an hour and a half in clips that took place over the course of one night (as well as a couple of minutes from six weeks ago). The backstory told in the viral marketting shows all this stuff about soft drinks, satellites, oil drilling in the ocean, major coprorations, etc. The story behind the giant monster which destroys my home town seems far larger and more important than a dude and his buddy trying to rescue some chick.Buttonbasher said:
I agree that the change of view is nice. However, you misunderstood my suggestion. I was saying, the same group could still be followed around the city. You could still tell the same story, but instead of just one angle from a handheld camera, encorporating a bunch of other angles from naturally occuring cameras in our completely media and reality show obsessed society, would have worked much better.Buttonbasher said:
I was here in downtown NYC the morning of 9/11. My wife was working at Rockafellar Center. My infant son was in a Brooklyn nursery school. When the second plane hit, I got the fuck out of town and went to get my son to keep him safe. I didn't drag him back to midtown to get my wife. But, like you said...it's a different situation.Buttonbasher said:
I understand and I get how people can really like the movie. I'm just saying that the movie did a bunch of things badly. I didn't like some of the choices they made, even though I liked the concept.Buttonbasher said:
That's not this movie's story, though. "Where did the monster come from?" might be the story that is more interesting to you, but that's not the story they ever intended to tell.K0NY said:
Following people with this level of detail (and this perspective) is pretty new. Not to mention that they are following people who are total bystanders -- a Godzilla movie would follow someone who is trying to kill/destroy/defeat the monster.
Buttonbasher
Member
You bring up valid points. I was mainly trying to explain about the viral stuff not really effecting the movie. They explain a bit about the universe but don't directly affect the film in many ways. I liked how they did things, and found myself more interested about the people than getting a good look at the monster. It could be because I knew more about the characters from the viral stuff, but I really think it tied into my thoughts about who's closest to me. I don't want to derail this thread any further, but let's just agree to disagree on some of these things, and hope that the movie brings back the monster movie genre so that we can both be happy.K0NY said:
I thought the viral marketting explains that the main character is going to work for the company responsible for the monster. Doesn't that tie him directly, just like in Godzilla movies?border said:
BTW: If you do a search on IMDB for the term, "Godzilla" it brings up Cloverfield as one of the top results.
Buttonbasher
Member
K0NY said:
Rob's going to work for Slusho, which is owned by Tagruato who's drilling stations allegedly awoke the monster.
That still doesn't exactly put him in the same role as a Godzilla bystander -- who is usually either a scientist trying to figure out how to kill the monster or a media person embedded with the military that is fighting the monster. A standard monster movie tends to have characters that are involved in the battle to defeat the monster, but in Cloverfield the characters are just trying to escape or survive.K0NY said:
And I'm still somewhat of the opinion that all the viral/internet stuff is really more the invention of the marketing team than it is the machinations of the writer and director. They realized that the movie had gaps in information that would leave people unsatisfied, and haphazardly tried to fill those gaps. I think it will be interesting to find out how much of the Slusho stuff was invented after-the-fact and how much was really intended by creators. For the most part, I just wish it wasn't there -- mainly because of how janky, piecemeal, and incongruent it seems.
Dark Octave
Banned
I saw the movie last night. Kinda wish I waitied for it to come to video.
WordAssassin
Member
Slusho's been there since the very beginning. When the trailer first hit there was someone in it wearing a Slusho shirt, and Slusho was a brand that was invented specifically for this movie. You guys have to keep in mind that this is a movie by JJ Abrams and Matt Reeves, the guys who do LOST and have HUGE erections for this mystery/viral shit.border said:
Escape Goat
Member
Wasn't Elle drinking a Slusho in an episode of Heroes?
Count Dookkake
Member
WordAssassin said:
But you must also remember if it didn't happen in the movie, it didn't happen.
This stuff sounds way too much like the goings-on of Star Wars "expanded universe" fans, who insist that Boba Fett escaped from the Sarlaac Pit or that Degobah houses some kind of Dark Side temple.
WordAssassin
Member
Oh, I know. There's clearly two groups for this movie, those who take the movie JUST as it's given to us, and those who seek the entire viral bullshit world. (Though I'm in the latter) It's just like LOST. They explained what the numbers are for in a viral ARG, but it will likely NEVER come into play in the show. It's all just fluff that's there if you choose to look for it. I personally really like it, but it's also nice to know that they craft their stories both ways. (So that you can take them at face value and not NEED the viral stuff)
Since drawing Clover seems to be the "in" thing to do on the interbutts these days...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v233/MastahCrushed/cloversketch.jpg
Tell me how much it sucks.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v233/MastahCrushed/cloversketch.jpg
Tell me how much it sucks.
Patrick Klepek
furiously molesting tim burton
WordAssassin said:
Yep, exactly. Some people don't dig stories designed that way, but I sure do.
There's one quote that encapsulated Abram's approach very well recently; something to the effect of Abrams having an obsession with boxes. He cares less about what's IN the box than the mystery of what COULD be in the box. That explains some of the disappointment in mytho wrap ups in Alias -- but hopefully that's not the same fate for LOST.
- Status