Cloverfield: spoiler thread/discussion (only click if you've seen the movie)

[acidline]

I have watched the movie.

I now have questions after reading this thread...

- I read that Tido wave Targuado shit...what the fuck is that all about?

- Wtf is the slushie shit

- Tanker disturbing it's sleep?

Headache.

[fortune]

I have watched the movie.

I now have questions after reading this thread...

- I read that Tido wave Targuado shit...what the fuck is that all about?

- Wtf is the slushie shit

- Tanker disturbing it's sleep?

Headache.

slusho is the company rob is going to VP in japan i believe.

[eldave04]

I just saw it, and I didn't see it as being about the monster at all. I think the monster was irrelevent, and merely provided the kick in the nuts that the main char needed to realize his love for the hot girl.

I saw it as a great love story, where a group of people were willing to die for something rather than live for nothing. What would have happened to the main char, and clearly the love of his life if the monster had never started blowing shit up?

IMO, it was better for them to struggle through the ~5 hours where they were honest with themselves than live a lifetime of self-delusion.

I'm glad they didn't reveal more info about the monster as it would have taken away from what I saw as the 'real' meaning behind the movie.

Maybe I read into it too much...

[powerviolence]

I just saw it, and I didn't see it as being about the monster at all. I think the monster was irrelevent, and merely provided the kick in the nuts that the main char needed to realize his love for the hot girl.

I saw it as a great love story, where a group of people were willing to die for something rather than live for nothing. What would have happened to the main char, and clearly the love of his life if the monster had never started blowing shit up?

IMO, it was better for them to struggle through the ~5 hours where they were honest with themselves than live a lifetime of self-delusion.

I'm glad they didn't reveal more info about the monster as it would have taken away from what I saw as the 'real' meaning behind the movie.

Maybe I read into it too much...

thanks, now I appreciate it a bit more then when I first saw it!

that really does make sense

[powerviolence]

I just saw it, and I didn't see it as being about the monster at all. I think the monster was irrelevent, and merely provided the kick in the nuts that the main char needed to realize his love for the hot girl.

I saw it as a great love story, where a group of people were willing to die for something rather than live for nothing. What would have happened to the main char, and clearly the love of his life if the monster had never started blowing shit up?

IMO, it was better for them to struggle through the ~5 hours where they were honest with themselves than live a lifetime of self-delusion.

I'm glad they didn't reveal more info about the monster as it would have taken away from what I saw as the 'real' meaning behind the movie.

Maybe I read into it too much...

thanks, now I appreciate it a bit more then when I first saw it!

that really does make sense

+rep

[sybaritical]

Hahaha that was great!

I dug it properly.

Best sunday night popcorn movie I've seen in ages.

1) Diaphonous storyline? Check.

2) Extremely hot chicks in short skirts being all helpless? Check.

3) Insane destruction of pretty much everything? Check.

4) Big snorty monster who moans like Rambo assfucking his cellmate? Check.

5) Small scratchy anklebiting monsters that can chase you down tunnels and up

liftshafts if you managed to evade mum? Check.

6) Splendid product placement opportunities? Check.

7) Shaky camerawork that serves as a panacea for pretty much everything you were

expecting from the movie and didn't get? Check.

8) Happy end frame that takes the sting out of leaving the theatre knowing your

favourite hot chick just got totally mangled? Check.

Awesome.

[sybaritical]

PS: I just watched the end scene again and I couldn't see nothing landing in the ocean

anywhere.

[Guest jmatsu]

don't give a shit about this film.

just want Michael Giacchino's roar! overture mp3. me r give big rep.

[ktothe]

Does the DVD have a none shaky version so I can watch it without earling on my couch?

Worst post production decision ever.

[godwinfj]

It wouldn't be quite the same film if it wasn't shot shaky, I thought it was a nice touch to present everything from a camcorder perspective (I only just watched this myself, on DVD, well, on the computer rather), the lack of a musical score also adds a lot to this aesthetic. That and the idea of the old tape footage being erased was fairly interesting . If you really are turned off by it, then I reckon you probably wouldn't enjoy the story. My only complaint is that the love/friendship story thing becomes detached from any semblance of realism and really lame as soon as the monstarr appears, it doesn't feel like the nerd crowd could appreciate the sentimental side of the story, or vice versa, because the movie seems to be trying to please both camps and you get this weird thing that's somewhere in the awkward middle.

sybaritical: Check out the right half of the shot, you will see it this ghost of a thing fly diagonally into the water, it's barely visible on DVD though.

[ktothe]

It wouldn't be quite the same film if it wasn't shot shaky, I thought it was a nice touch to present everything from a camcorder perspective (I only just watched this myself, on DVD, well, on the computer rather), the lack of a musical score also adds a lot to this aesthetic. That and the idea of the old tape footage being erased was fairly interesting . If you really are turned off by it, then I reckon you probably wouldn't enjoy the story. My only complaint is that the love/friendship story thing becomes detached from any semblance of realism and really lame as soon as the monstarr appears, it doesn't feel like the nerd crowd could appreciate the sentimental side of the story, or vice versa, because the movie seems to be trying to please both camps and you get this weird thing that's somewhere in the awkward middle.

sybaritical: Check out the right half of the shot, you will see it this ghost of a thing fly diagonally into the water, it's barely visible on DVD though.

Thats stupid. Why would I not like the story now that im able to watch it without throwing up all over myself? I dont know how the Shaky cam adds a damn thing to it. Have you ever watched any sort of movie and said 'you know what would make this movie AWESOME!?!? Shake the shit out of the camera! Hell yeah son!'

No.

Ive already seen the movie, I like it, Its just impossible for me to sit through a second time. I hardly made it through the first time.

[godwinfj]

Thats stupid. Why would I not like the story now that im able to watch it without throwing up all over myself? I dont know how the Shaky cam adds a damn thing to it. Have you ever watched any sort of movie and said 'you know what would make this movie AWESOME!?!? Shake the shit out of the camera! Hell yeah son!'

No.

Ive already seen the movie, I like it, Its just impossible for me to sit through a second time. I hardly made it through the first time.

Uhh because it then wouldn't look like it was shot on a handycam? Most of it really was shot that way, so it's not really some kind of "post-production decision". Not hating on you yeah, just saying, and I didn't know you had already seen it so my bad.

[ktothe]

Actually, all of the shaky cam was done in post.

I still think the reasoning is wack. If it wasnt all shaky would you have complianed that it didnt look like it was shot on handycam? I highly doubt it. I doubt anyone would have noticed. The only thing that would be different is a lot less people would hate the movie.

[godwinfj]

Actually, all of the shaky cam was done in post.

I still think the reasoning is wack. If it wasnt all shaky would you have complianed that it didnt look like it was shot on handycam? I highly doubt it. I doubt anyone would have noticed. The only thing that would be different is a lot less people would hate the movie.

I would if they just took it away, when there's something to compare it against, but probably not if it were originally that way, it's about achieving the illusion? Though of course if it's meant to look like handycam but ends up looking all steadicam then I'd think something's seriously out of place. Where did you read that it's postwork? Have you tried watching it on a smaller screen? Might it have to do with the huge theatre projection? EDIT: assumptions! I guess you could've watched the DVD and hated it too, then I'm sorry.

[FunkyFrenchy]

I've not read the thread but seen the movie and i liked it a lot!!

loved the us army fighting in NYC.