Cloverfield Yeah awesome movie!!!!!!!!

MattSullivan · Post by **MattSullivan** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 5:30 pm

Yes! SEE IT, THEN complain about it if you want

vrikasatma · Post by **vrikasatma** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 5:31 pm

I get motion sickness.

The film's really not that bad. I sat back about twelve rows. It was a little annoying for the first few minutes but then my brain adjusted and compensated and I was fine. If you sit far enough back you should be okay.

Seriously, I can't do those simulator-show thingies at amusement parks and arcades, I invariably get sick. I have to avoid Tomorrowland like the plague because I can't handle those attractions. Heck, I had to close my eyes during those old Regal openers — the one with the POV roller coaster going through explosions of popcorn — because it threw me into full-on vertigo.

PariahPoet · Post by **PariahPoet** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:17 pm

Well, my problem is that I get sick even watching a cartoon in a theatre. Just having a large moving screen in front of me is enough to make me queazy.
But the mate and I are planning to catch a matinee show of it tomorrow to hopefully avoid the worst crowds. (although he will have to drive because I fully intend to swallow a small pharmacy beforehand!

)

vrikasatma · Post by **vrikasatma** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:42 pm

I'm told Dramamine does work. Take it an hour before the show.
This is a major discussion point on the IMDb discussions of the film. Several different people came out and said, "I saw it once, went back again after taking Dramamine and was fine."

Really, I think once you get in there and get caught up, you'll be okay

Have a great time!

Avareis · Post by **Avareis** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:09 am

MattSullivan wrote:Yes! SEE IT, THEN complain about it if you want

Fine....Fine....FINE! I'll see it, MATT! I'll see it! And when I do, I'm coming back here and I'm going to complain! You watch! I'll complain! Then, I'm going to say, "See, Matt! I was right! Matt! MATT!!!"

Sorry about that. It seems that I've had a little too much rum and coke. Kids, don't drink. Drinking is bad and it turns off one's brain. But really, I'll see it. It just depends on how and when. As for the hype, I've seen a lot of advertisement about people wanting to see it and getting all excited like they've had an enima and are better people for it. It was kind of sickening to see that type of stuff. It like, "Uuuuo. A movie with no name. It's so fresh and different from anything else before." Where I was, people talk about it like it's Star Wars all over again. I'm thinking, "Big deal. It's just a movie and Star Wars was stupid. I'll say it. It's a movie, you like it or you don't." Whatever, as long as it's worth 15 dollars. That's how much it costs these days.

Terastas · Post by **Terastas** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 9:44 am

ravaged_warrior wrote:By the way, will the movie not be as good if you see the monster beforehand? Because I just saw a sketch of it.

Was this the sketch you saw? If so, no, it won't, because that was yet another piece of misleading info leaked during the development. Someone I know that has seen the movie confirmed that it looks nothing like that.

MattSullivan wrote:No one's trying to OVERHYPE a movie. It's called PROMOTION! Much in the same way this website is "overpromoting" Freeborn.

No offense Matt, but what the Cloverfield marketing team essentially did was the same thing you did with yours and Alpha's Dinosausers thread.

"Psst! Hey, hey, I've got a secret! We're making a movie. . . But that's all I'm telling you! Hee-hee-hee!"
*throws a smoke grenade and disappears*

They went through that whole big song and dance just to tell us the name of the movie, and the overall response was about the same as it was when you and Alpha revealed the logo: One great big "Huh?" The irony is not only that Cloverfield was just a working title, but that they could have just as easily given it the intended title and had the same results (Cloverfield is a street near Abrams' office, and the movie was originally supposed to be called Greyshot, which is part of Central Park).

And please, don't get offended that I'm not seeing this in theaters. I'm on a strict budget that only lets me see, like, one or two movies in theaters a year. Last year I even waited for The Departed to come out on video.

MattSullivan · Post by **MattSullivan** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:37 am

But you see, it's YOUR fault for being upset about the logo. You put it in YOUR mind that this could be something HUGE. I personally find it HILARIOUS the way people are reacting to our "movie" For all you know, this could have been a giant JOKE

And maybe it is

But that's beside the point. Whether you're making a joke or promoting a real movie like Cloverfield your job is to get inside people's heads and make them CURIOUS. And that's what the filmmakers have done well. It's the reason Cloverfield is gonna sweep up at the box office this weekend.

Oh, and for the record, i went again yesterday with 2 friends, but we had to leave because they both got motion sickness. IIIIIRONYYYYY!

ravaged_warrior · Post by **ravaged_warrior** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 3:33 pm

Was this the sketch you saw? If so, no, it won't, because that was yet another piece of misleading info leaked during the development. Someone I know that has seen the movie confirmed that it looks nothing like that.

The link isn't working, but I can tell you, I saw the movie twice and the sketch I saw was the real deal. The answer to my question was no. They show the monster a lot, and you get a good idea of what it looks like fairly early into the movie.

Terastas · Post by **Terastas** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:48 pm

MattSullivan wrote:But you see, it's YOUR fault for being upset about the logo. You put it in YOUR mind that this could be something HUGE. I personally find it HILARIOUS the way people are reacting to our "movie" For all you know, this could have been a giant JOKE

And maybe it is

That was actually my initial impression (hence my claims to be writing Happy Hamster Land). I'd expect something goofy like that on a chat forum among friends, but not as a major announcement to the media by somebody like J.J. Abrams. You and Alpha are just gambling with some free time on your hands; Abrams and co. gambled with millions.

I know something you don't know
You don't know, you don't know
I know something you don't know
About Cloverfield. *poof*

Silverclaw · Post by **Silverclaw** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:33 am

Just saw it today.
Was awesome

I really liked it (though it was really loud during some parts)
Very believable, good acting, cool monsters...

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:53 am

Avareis wrote:
MattSullivan wrote:Yes! SEE IT, THEN complain about it if you want
Fine....Fine....FINE! I'll see it, MATT! I'll see it! And when I do, I'm coming back here and I'm going to complain! You watch! I'll complain! Then, I'm going to say, "See, Matt! I was right! Matt! MATT!!!"

Sorry about that. It seems that I've had a little too much rum and coke. Kids, don't drink. Drinking is bad and it turns off one's brain. But really, I'll see it. It just depends on how and when. As for the hype, I've seen a lot of advertisement about people wanting to see it and getting all excited like they've had an enima and are better people for it. It was kind of sickening to see that type of stuff. It like, "Uuuuo. A movie with no name. It's so fresh and different from anything else before." Where I was, people talk about it like it's Star Wars all over again. I'm thinking, "Big deal. It's just a movie and Star Wars was stupid. I'll say it. It's a movie, you like it or you don't." Whatever, as long as it's worth 15 dollars. That's how much it costs these days.

hmmm....

You SHOULD take your own advice. The life you save could be your own.

As for the film....I'll wait till its on Blu-Ray. (I have the feeling it'll be a HD-DVD exclusive.)

Defensorem Lupus · Post by **Defensorem Lupus** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:42 am

I was completely hyped about this movie. Being a fan of J.J. Abrams and Lost I needed to see this movie. I have been saving $11 for it since I first herd of it last year. I finally got my chance to see it two days ago and was blown away. Dog Soldiers has been my favorite movie but Cloverfield might now be my all time favorite. This was one awesome movie.
I liked the whole home video camera thing, the realism of it made it all better like as if I was watching it on YouTube or something like that. While watching it I forgot I was in the movie theater and thought I was at home watching it on the computer or TV.
This is one movie that needs to be watched, I am not kidding, do not wait until it comes out on DVD, look for it online or spend the money to go watch it at the movies, this is one movie that shall not be forgotten that easily.
I think the Cloverfield monster should be known as America's insane and intense monster. No more using monsters from other countries.
THE BEST MOVIE EVER!!!!!!!!!!

Avareis · Post by **Avareis** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:49 am

Figarou wrote:
Avareis wrote: Sorry about that. It seems that I've had a little too much rum and coke. Kids, don't drink. Drinking is bad and it turns off one's brain.

hmmm....

You SHOULD take your own advice. The life you save could be your own.

You know, you're right, Fig. For now on I'm going to cut down on drinking coke with everything I have. Thanks!

I'm seeing it this Friday. My friends already saw it and said some mixed remarks. They're taking me so I don't have to spend money on the ticket. Which is good. I need to get some food to go with it. Pizza...yummm

MattSullivan · Post by **MattSullivan** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 4:14 pm

So, Mr. Dragon, you didnt care that it was New York getting trashed? Because all the new york critics seem to have despised the film.

Silverclaw · Post by **Silverclaw** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:28 pm

As for the film....I'll wait till its on Blu-Ray. (I have the feeling it'll be a HD-DVD exclusive.

I thought that Blu-Ray just recently won over HD-DVD? Someone told me the last big movie studio changed over for the Blu-Ray exclusive about 2 weeks ago.

...and screw the New York critics

Was a great movie.

PariahPoet · Post by **PariahPoet** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 pm

Daniel and I saw it Sunday.
What I actually saw of it was good, but as expected, I spent the entire thing on the verge of tossing my cookies. So I had my eyes closed for half the thing. Even had to get up and go outside to get a Sprite in the middle of it so I wouldn't throw up there in the theatre. And all of this is after taking twice the recommended dose of meclezine.

I mostly blame the theatre though- they had it about 75-80 degrees in there which just made it even worse.

As for the actual movie- like I said, what I actually saw, I liked. The acting was pretty good, the special effects were wonderful, and the pseudo-story kept my interest. (my use of pseudo-story does not mean that the story was not good, I mean that as the film did not really revolve around a story in the traditional sense) The monster was pretty creepy too. I'm glad it was what it was. Looked like something out of DOOM.

chubhound · Post by **chubhound** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:49 am

Terastas wrote:Was this the sketch you saw? If so, no, it won't, because that was yet another piece of misleading info leaked during the development. Someone I know that has seen the movie confirmed that it looks nothing like that.

I kinda wish that WAS how it looked in the movie. When I saw that sketch, I thought it looked pretty darn original and, for a change, DIDN'T look like the art guys were trying too hard to make the creature look scary & mean so you'd KNOW it was a big nasty mean thing out to hurt everyone. By the way, was it just me, or did anyone else get the sense that the monster changed size in a few scenes? In any case, I think those freaky spider/cricket/alligator hybrid whatevers were a heck of a lot creepier than the big monster. Could be that I have a thing about bugs though.

IndianaJones · Post by **IndianaJones** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:56 am

Cloverfield is a pretty short movie, it's only 1 hour 24 minutes. It's one of the short movies for 2008. Too bad I miss it, last weekend. Sounds like the Media wants to bring up the fear level up our heads.

vrikasatma · Post by **vrikasatma** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:58 am

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 4:31 am

Defensorem Lupus · Post by **Defensorem Lupus** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:24 pm

No Matt, this is my kind of movie and living close to Manhatten I am happy to see familier areas and know that I was there or near there where the characters and/or monster were. I was glad they decided to do it in New York City. NYC is the best place to film a movie like this in. Everytime I think about the movie I want to own it on DVD. J.J. Abrams was right when he said he wanted America to have an insane and intence monster. The whole movie was insane and intence! It was done so good, I hope that they will continue the story and explained exactly what happen that night in NYC after finding the video evidence. AWESOME MOVIE!

MoonKit · Post by **MoonKit** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:43 pm

Haha. The Jason Bourne movies were too shaky for me...I cant imagine this one!

But it seems to be getting really good reviews everywhere. Maybe Ill rent it when it comes out.

Doruk Golcu · Post by **Doruk Golcu** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 1:33 am

I live in Manhattan, and quite liked the movie. I find New York critics are overly sensitive about anything that even remotely reminds them of 9/11. Actually, at least one scene took place only a few blocks from my home o.O

Aki · Post by **Aki** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 7:01 pm

I thought it was OMGWTFAWESOME, even if the shaky camera did make me a bit disoriented at times it also allowed for some brilliant scenes (like the tunnel! Oh man. Were I Hud, I would've soiled myself....). It made for a pretty intense movie and felt rather real and really put you in the character's shoes.

I was surprised how much screen time the monster got. I figured it was going to be saved for a single shot at the end/some footage at the middle to the end or such, but it actually got shown every now and then wrecking s*** and had a couple really good shots of it.

I kinda wish that WAS how it looked in the movie. When I saw that sketch, I thought it looked pretty darn original and, for a change, DIDN'T look like the art guys were trying too hard to make the creature look scary & mean so you'd KNOW it was a big nasty mean thing out to hurt everyone. By the way, was it just me, or did anyone else get the sense that the monster changed size in a few scenes? In any case, I think those freaky spider/cricket/alligator hybrid whatevers were a heck of a lot creepier than the big monster. Could be that I have a thing about bugs though.

It's called perspective. It looks big from the ground, and it looks smaller when you're standing in a tall building, just like anything else.

I must agree on the monster's design. It looked damn cool.

Doruk Golcu · Post by **Doruk Golcu** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:57 am

Judging from the interviews with the filmmakers, the monster was just a baby that was lashing out in fear due to being separated from its mommy... Awwww, poor widdle cuddly city-destroying critter!!! Also explains why it doesn't always look scary >.>