Cloverfield: Yay or Nay?

[anonymous920314]

So for those of you who've seen the ever-so-hyped movie Cloverfield already, what did you think?

I personally think it was AMAZING, I loved it. Definitely in my top five favourite movies . . . my favourite movie of it's type.

I'll go into detail later about what I liked so much about it . . but I'm too tired right now and I've explained and talked about it to the point of exhaustion today . . so hahahah

 

[Æsahættr]

It was alright. You're right about it being ever-so-hyped. I have mixed feelings about it.

I hated the ending, I thought it was tacky and abrupt. Overall, I thought it was great until I realised the movie had just finished.

Spoiler

I would've thought the monster concept was great, if we knew what it was. Trust J. J. Abrams to come up with a freaky monster, not explain it, and then remove any discernible ending (yeah, I don't like LOST either.)

I really wanted an explanation about the "infection" too.

All in all, I'd say it was very Gozilla-esque, with 28 Weeks Later themes. It follows a young group of partygoers and their experience with the events, but I found their motives throughout the movie a little hard to swallow. I don't regret seeing it per se, but I came out of the theater all little empty and unfulfilled, as if I bought a drink and it was half full. What you do get is great but it's not ultimately what you paid for.

 

[Rayne]

I'm really looking forward to Cloverfield. I'm glad to hear that you think it's awesome, (I haven't checked other places for fear of spoilers) but I was worried that the hype leading up to the movie would only work against meeting my expectations and getting my hopes up. From early critic reviews and ratings, I think my fears may be assuaged.

The promos were handled really well, meant to convey suspense and thrill but still keep you guessing which is something seriously lacking in other movie promo stunts. I really tried to stay out of high traffic discussions to avoid any spoilers, I really want this to be good. (I guess I took a chance when I walked in here).

Since I haven't watched yet, I'll be back to say what I think.

 

[Zeta]

This is what happens when you combine the worst parts of the Blair Witch Project, Godzilla, and Lost. A nonsensical concept that tries to be hip and edgy by tapping into "teh YouTubes" with no well-thought out explanation or exposition hiding as being "mysterious" and "intelligent". When really it's just the writer being too lazy or too crappy to actually say anything with it. Other than "HEEYZ! Wut if Teh US had a Godzilla attack and some kids recorded it and put it on YouTubes?! lolz"

 

[Swifty]

I love it when writers who use the narrative technique of "Show Don't Tell" are criticized for being lazy.

 

[anonymous920314]

^yeah, same here.

uhh, well I just came across some rather interesting news:

Spoiler

Apparently if you sticked after the credits, you would have heard an audio clip from AFTER the movie ended. Played backwards (of course!), Rob clearly says, "it's still alive!" implying that there is going to be a sequel

And also, I heard a lot of people missed this (I did, but my friend didn't) but it's true:

Spoiler

the ending of them at coney island wasn't just played for no reason, apparently it shows the alien entering the water, a la War of the Worlds in a roundish looking thing falling from the sky

Not so much pertaining to the movie, but rather the context it should be viewed in I guess:

Spoiler

I think the whole masterpiece is that it WASN'T resolved, and according to my AP Lit readings given to us from test makers, this is what seperates an immature reader from a mature reader. An immature reader is someone who always wants some sort of closure, a resolution to what they just read. This, I would think, also applies to movies and television. Now I'm not saying you guys are immature, I'm just pointing out that, in literary terms, the movie excels due to it's lack of resolution and suspense.

 

[Zeta]

I think the whole masterpiece is that it WASN'T resolved, and according to my AP Lit readings given to us from test makers, this is what seperates an immature reader from a mature reader. An immature reader is someone who always wants some sort of closure, a resolution to what they just read. This, I would think, also applies to movies and television. Now I'm not saying you guys are immature, I'm just pointing out that, in literary terms, the movie excels due to it's lack of resolution and suspense.

Um, no. Lack of resolution doesn't make anything more mature. You think that because generally, things meant for kids have everything spelled out for them very carefully. The reverse is not true. Having a movie where basically stuff happens for unexplained reasons does not make it more "advanced" or more mature. It IS a common fallacy, though. What you have in this movie is basically a deus ex machina plot. The writer doesn't bother to think of why these things happens and expects you to do it for free, instead of him having to do *gasp* work. This is pretty much what the Lost production staff does.

For more on the "I don't understand it, therefore it must be GENIUS!" mindset, see below:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TrueArtIsIncomprehensible

Leaving some things up to the imagination is one thing. Leaving the entire backstory, explanation, and reasoning for a movie's plot is lazy. Yeah, they showed. But what they showed explains nothing and has no substance. Show don't tell is NOT the same thing as "Don't Show AND Don't Tell Because People Will Think It's Cooler and More Intelligent That Way And We Don't Have to Do More Work". "Monster shows up for no reason with no explanation and destroys stuff also for no reason" is not a plot. It's a Godzilla movie with the interesting parts removed . . .

Remember how everyone thought Lost was this brilliant show because they thought it was superintelligent specifically because they couldn't understand it, and were certain it all meant something amazingly complex? And then most of their audience stopped writing when people realized, nope - the writers just throw in crazy-ass shit as they go along to get people to THINK it's brilliant because they can't undersrtand that? Well, they took the US Godzilla movie and rewrote it in that fashion. And it somehow came out less cheesy but even more stupid.

 

[Æsahættr]

Leaving some things up to the imagination is one thing. Leaving the entire backstory, explanation, and reasoning for a movie's plot is lazy.

Just, like the

Spoiler

biting "infection" thing. They might as well have said "we think they spread a virus when they bite" for all the information they gave us. Not to mention the effects were blink-and-you-miss-it.

All of the panic caused by her bite told us that monster-bite = BAD, and that wasn't exactly hard to work out.

I'm just pointing out that, in literary terms, the movie excels due to it's lack of resolution and suspense.

Well, you can claim that the writers weren't being lazy by leaving out exposition, but seriously, for all the thought that went into that backstory, you'd think it was written for a grade-school paper. I can see that, because it was from their perspective, it's realistic to be clueless (as most people in that situation would be),

Spoiler

but they could've easily added an info-dump from the nameless soldier who breaks all protocol to let strangers he's known for all of 30 seconds out into the city.

Remember how everyone thought Lost was this brilliant show because they thought it was superintelligent specifically because they couldn't understand it, and were certain it all meant something amazingly complex? And then most of their audience stopped writing when people realized, nope - the writers just throw in crazy-ass shit as they go along to get people to THINK it's brilliant because they can't undersrtand that? Well, they took the US Godzilla movie and rewrote it in that fashion. And it somehow came out less cheesy but even more stupid.

Couldn't have put my thoughts any more succinctly.

 

[Fig]

Remember how everyone thought Lost was this brilliant show because they thought it was superintelligent specifically because they couldn't understand it, and were certain it all meant something amazingly complex? And then most of their audience stopped writing when people realized, nope - the writers just throw in crazy-ass shit as they go along to get people to THINK it's brilliant because they can't undersrtand that?

I like the smell of snobbish nerds in the morning.

(Also, technically, we don't know whether any of what you just said is true ; we still sort of have three (short) seasons to go through before we can say for a fact they were bullshitting the viewers. But hey, don't let little things like that get the way of your ranting)

 

[Swifty]

Remember how everyone thought Lost was this brilliant show because they thought it was superintelligent specifically because they couldn't understand it, and were certain it all meant something amazingly complex? And then most of their audience stopped writing when people realized, nope - the writers just throw in crazy-ass shit as they go along to get people to THINK it's brilliant because they can't undersrtand that?

What the hell are you talking about? The general consensus among TV viewers was that third season of Lost sucked at the beginning while in the second half, the writers suddenly got good again.

Most people watch Lost not because they want to figure out what's with the island. A lot of people like Lost because of the character development and the well written episodes.

Leaving some things up to the imagination is one thing. Leaving the entire backstory, explanation, and reasoning for a movie's plot is lazy. Yeah, they showed. But what they showed explains nothing and has no substance. Show don't tell is NOT the same thing as "Don't Show AND Don't Tell Because People Will Think It's Cooler and More Intelligent That Way And We Don't Have to Do More Work". "Monster shows up for no reason with no explanation and destroys stuff also for no reason" is not a plot. It's a Godzilla movie with the interesting parts removed . . .

Oh please. And then we get another god damn derivative disaster flick with the charming multiple characters that are seemingly have no relation to each other but then come together at the end in the classic Charles Dickens full circle. Here we have the hardened U.S National Guard soldier who's unit was activated during the attack, the single mother who must get her two kids out of the city, the hot shot F/A-18 Navy pilot, the president, and the FDNY firefighter who's trying to look for his construction worker friend.

Yup, here's the sweeping camera shot of the monster. Let's rotate it around 360 degrees about 10 times as it's deliciously trashing buildings. Uh huh, now here's the conversation between the president and the Joint Chiefs of Staff about how we need to launch a nuke into the city before it gets out of hand. Then here's Jeff Goldblum and Matthew Broderick advising the President not to do it. We launch the nuke and it has no effect because the monster is supposed to die from water/bacteria/dirt/Mac Virus so that we can wallow over the irony.

Cloverfield is awesome because it did almost none of the above bullshit. No, they didn't conveniently have an ensemble cast of charismatic stars that would sell the movie alone. They got a bunch of unknown schmucks who fit the film's premise of normal people in extraordinary situations. No, they didn't bore me to death with a technobabble excuse of why the monster came they just had a cool premise and ran with it. No, they were no glitzy special effects; they had a defined focus on immersion and atmosphere.

 

[anonymous920314]

Yeah, I have to say, the film was marketed AS a hand-held recorded movie, and J.J. said that it was going to be all hand-held.

Now, you tell me. If you were in this type of posisiton that the characters were, how much would you really expect to end up knowing by the end of your life. Why does the bite have to be explained, we know it's horrible to get! What else do we need to fill in the background? And anyways, the military guy most likely can't say anything, and it's just showing that this IS a normal guy in the military. Are every single one going to know EXACTLY what's going on?

No.

You have to remember, that bite incident was only about an hour and a half after the thing started, the whole movie was seven hours. You mean to tell me that in seven hours, almost EVERYTHING is going to be explained through a hand-held camcorder? Give me a break, this just made it more realistic than anything.

 

[Barb]

I'm debating seeing this movie. On the one hand, I hear it's great but on the other hand, I hear it's this year's 'Snakes on a Plane.'

 

[Torgetsu Kon]

I'm thinking about seeing it to, but seriously? It's seven hours long?

 

[fate]

I assume the "seven hours" refers to the period of time the movie covers. I don't think there is or will ever be a 7 hour movie...

 

[Æsahættr]

I'm debating seeing this movie. On the one hand, I hear it's great but on the other hand, I hear it's this year's 'Snakes on a Plane.'

Oh, no it isn't that bad. Like I said before, I thought it was pretty good right up until I realised it'd just finished. I don't think it was so much there being no resolution, just the fact that it was so damn abrupt, like the powers just gone out.

 

[anonymous920314]

. . like a movie camera would.

 

[Bleak]

Loved it, it kept me on the edge of my seat the entire time, and I was definitely satisfied with the end result.

 

[Æsahættr]

. . like a movie camera would.

I really wish you'd stop doing that. I can agree with most of your points but the bottom line is, it's my opinion so you aren't likely change my mind. You asked for my opinion, and I gave it to you. In my case, I didn't like the ending. In you're case, you did. I don't see why it has to be debated.

Also, when Barb and Rayne and others who haven't seen it view the thread, of course they're going to want to know why/if some people (god forbid) didn't like it.

 

[anonymous920314]

Yeah, sorry I realized how snobby that sounded as I was opening up this thread again. I had just had a really crappy morning and was running on two hours of sleep, so once again I apoligize.

Yes, I am teh stupid for arguing in a thread were I asked for opinions. Dx

 

[Dual]

This is what happens when you combine the worst parts of the Blair Witch Project, Godzilla, and Lost. A nonsensical concept that tries to be hip and edgy by tapping into "teh YouTubes" with no well-thought out explanation or exposition hiding as being "mysterious" and "intelligent". When really it's just the writer being too lazy or too crappy to actually say anything with it. Other than "HEEYZ! Wut if Teh US had a Godzilla attack and some kids recorded it and put it on YouTubes?! lolz"

QFT.

Spoiler

Every single thing about the plot was so predictable. The scene in the tunnels, the part on the bridge, all of it.