Cloverfield

[Hero]

I missed the shot at the end and staying through the credits did'nt seem worth it, all I could hear was some muffling and that was it.

===KEN

[The Doctor]

Saw this last night.

Excellent sound design/editing and clever FX can't save this souless bore of a movie from being nowhere near as clever as it thinks it is. Zzzzzz.

-Ralph

[Jaymz]

Ralph, if you haven't seen it already then I'd recommend Korean movie The Host as a monster movie with soul. Or just a good movie in general.

[The Doctor]

I shall put that on my list of movies to check out, thanks.

-Ralph

[Hero]

I still love Kaiju films

Also: (spoiler for Cloverfield) - www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xbn9GdgclY&NR=1

[legios]

jaymz said:

Ralph, if you haven't seen it already then I'd recommend Korean movie The Host as a monster movie with soul. Or just a good movie in general.

I've read good things about that in a couple of sources. Been meaning to give that a go at some point but haven't gotten around to it. *gives himself a "must try harder" comment on report card*

Karl

[Jaymz]

legios said:

I've read good things about that in a couple of sources. Been meaning to give that a go at some point but haven't gotten around to it. *gives himself a "must try harder" comment on report card*

It really is worth checking out. I can see what Cloverfield was trying to do, but it was so poorly acted and lacking character that it didn't work for me.

The Host on the other hand, is a great family drama that doesn't take itself too seriously. It's only a fiver on play.com, treat yourself!

[Gav]

I...i don't know why people are saying it was poorly acted. It wasn't oscar nomination territory, but i thought it was decent enough.

It's not going to set the world ablaze, but it was an enjoyable romp.

[Bogatan]

Im with you, the acting was good enough, characterisation considering the type of film and how it was presented Im not sure how much character you can hope to portray, but I could understand each persons motivation for their actions throughout which is the pretty important for this film to work.

Andy

[Hero]

I really enjoyed Cloverfield and would definitley acquire it on DVD later on, maybe even see it again at the cinema.

===KEN

[Jaymz]

gav said:

I...i don't know why people are saying it was poorly acted.

At a guess, I'd say it was because they thought it was poorly acted...

But yeah, personally I didn't like it and wouldn't recommend it to anyone. However, if the film had turned out to be an overblown ad for a handheld camcorder, then I would have loved it.

[Hero]

I think anyone who saw this film two weeks ago saw it at the best time. The monster is now seen commercially all over YouTube and Hasbro recentley unveiled pictures of the upcoming monster figure.

===KEN

[Mark_Stevenson]

Yes, it's a one-trick pony. But personally, I rather enjoyed the trick.

Mx

[kayevcee]

hero said:

Hasbro recently unveiled pictures of the upcoming monster figure.

Really? Got a link handy?

EDIT: Found it in the Toyfare coverage.
Wow, it's... yeah. I guess "nightmarish" is the right word. I suppose that's what they were going for. A hundred bucks, though?

-Nick

[Hero]

It also comes with 10 parasite things too. Not worth $100 though, especially with how thin it is.

[The Doctor]

I still think the head looks like the Borad from the infamous Doctor Who adventure, 'Timelash', but much less frightening.

-Ralph

[charlesrocketboy]

My main problem with it is that it's trying to be a "real people on the ground react to terrifying event" story, but the characters, all of them, are walking back into a city being attacked by a monster in order to get one character's girlfriend. Which is not "real people" behaviour, that's Movie Character behaviour, and it doesn't fit into the film very well. (It also makes Rob look like a tosser - okay, you saved your girlfriend, but in the process you got two others killed. WELL DONE.)

The monster action is brilliant though.

[Bogatan]

In the context of helplessly watching your brother/boyfriend dying then seconds later hearing your girlfriend/friend crying out for in need of help I can see why they would. Rob has just lost his brother and the woman he loves who is in trouble because they argued and she left therefore walking into danger. Its guilt, despair anger take your pick. Since this is essentially a 911 monster movie you have to remember all the civilians who could have got out but stayed to help other victims. Many of them did die.

Andy

[legios]

A few folk have been telling me that I should see this film, so when it came available through my rental service I thought I would give it a go.

In honesty I am glad that I didn't go and see it at the cinema - it would have averaged out to costing me significantly more and I think I would have been more dissappointed that way.

Not that it is a bad film by any means - on a technically level it is very good. The hand-held shooting is great if you like that sort of thing, gives it a very "verite" feel to it and the cast make a very good fist of things. It is an interesting way to reinvent the 1970's disaster movie genre - it is just a shame that wasn't really the genre that they were aiming for.

"Cloverfield" makes for a pretty good disaster movie, and plays a lot of the disaster movie cards quite effectively. What it isn't - from my perspective - is a monster movie. The monster is not inherently required for the film to function. The same basic set of events could have been contrived out of... say, an earthquake or a large-scale terrorist attack. The monster is effectively just the excuse to send the characters through a familiar city falling apart. By contrast to something like "Gojira" (1954) - which may use the monster to say something about nuclear wapons, but does so in the context of a story that you couldn't have plugged in something else instead of a monster. The "Cloverfield" monster gets very little screen-time, and when it finally does appear properly it feels almost ancilliary to the actual drama. It is more of a "movie that happens to have a monster in it" than a "giant monster movie". (To some extent this is a blessing - as the monster, when it does appear, isn't terribly good. In fact it gave me more of a man in a suit vibe than some actual man-in-a-suit monsters have).

All told, I thought it was an interesting experiment and technically very well put together. It just feel a long way off-target from the perspective of being a giant monster film I felt.

Karl

[jameso]

I loved Cloverfield at the cinema, I want to check out the dvd but I'm slightly apprehensive as I think a repeat viewing might not stand up as much.

Not sure I agree that it doesn't really qualify as a monster movie - I think it does in the sense that a constant sense of danger for the protagonists, that any moment they could turn into a different street and run right into the monster's path, is prevelant all the way through. I think if it was an earthquake movie it would be more about surviving the aftermath, rather than trying to escape a current danger.
Though I would certainly say it didn't need to be a biological monster, could have been a giant robot for instance.