Cloverfield

Count Duckula

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
15,977
Location
Tali'Zorah vas Normandy.
Jesus fecking Christ that was a good film.

feck...

Me...


It's just SO good. People that slag this film off don't get it. It's not about plot, or character development, or witty dialogue (although the dialogue is great and the characters are extremely solid and believable -- let's be honest you wouldn't develop much as a person if you were running for your fecking life), it's about survival, and it's fecking tense and scary.

Edge of the seat stuff all of the way through. I can't recommend this film highly enough, I really can't.

One word of warning though -- if you get motion sickness I'd take some tablets before you go see it. I only get it very slightly, but there were still two scenes in particular in the film which caused me to feel a little queasy, and both times they were running along very fast and so obviously the camera was very shaky. Most of the time, though, it's just like watching a home movie, so if you can't bear to watch the video of your family's visit to DisneyWorld then you're not going to like this, otherwise you'll be fine.

GO SEE IT
 
15 I believe, Sam. And Devil -- only some critics slagged it, it's got very good reviews on metacritic (which amalgamates them), and reputable reviewers like the New York Times and Empire absolutely loved it.
 
Count Duckula said:
15 I believe, Sam. And Devil -- only some critics slagged it, it's got very good reviews on metacritic (which amalgamates them), and reputable reviewers like the New York Times and Empire absolutely loved it.
Click to expand...

Cheers Count.

By the way, Is this the film that for ages had no title, but instead was just know by it's release date and has been massively hyped up over the last few months ? Because if so, I know I've already earmarked it as a must see.
 
I don't listen to critics anyway. Hope to see it in London as soon as it's released.

Is is better than Godzilla?
 
It may well be.

Yeh, it's better than Godzilla :p

I live in Leicester, by the way, it came out in the UK today (February 1), so you could already go and see it.
 
Yea I watched it with the GF - she felt dizzy from the movie, and was on the verge of being sick the whole way throughout :mad:

Good movie nonetheless, not sure if I would recommend it as much as the OP has, but it was OK
 
this film fecking ruled! i do however feel sick now...


also the girl is hot.
 
Count Duckula said:
Jesus fecking Christ that was a good film.

feck...

Me...


It's just SO good. People that slag this film off don't get it. It's not about plot, or character development, or witty dialogue (although the dialogue is great and the characters are extremely solid and believable -- let's be honest you wouldn't develop much as a person if you were running for your fecking life), it's about survival, and it's fecking tense and scary.

Edge of the seat stuff all of the way through. I can't recommend this film highly enough, I really can't.

One word of warning though -- if you get motion sickness I'd take some tablets before you go see it. I only get it very slightly, but there were still two scenes in particular in the film which caused me to feel a little queasy, and both times they were running along very fast and so obviously the camera was very shaky. Most of the time, though, it's just like watching a home movie, so if you can't bear to watch the video of your family's visit to DisneyWorld then you're not going to like this, otherwise you'll be fine.

GO SEE IT
Click to expand...

Well said. Was a FANTASTIC FILM.

When I watched it the WHOLE cinema sat stunned in their seats, literally noone moved for about one minute when the movie ended.
 
Count Duckula said:
It may well be.

Yeh, it's better than Godzilla :p

I live in Leicester, by the way, it came out in the UK today (February 1), so you could already go and see it.
Click to expand...

Funny, it's not listed on my local flea pit's website. I'll have to walk down and checked out there.
 
032Devil said:
Slagged off by the critics.
Click to expand...

It hasn't actually, it's got 72% on RottenTomatoes, that's pretty fecking high for a film like that.

I haven't seen it yet, I'm tempted to download it but I think it'll be much better if viewed in the cinema.
 
The thing i loved about it was that the focus was not on the monster. The monster was just there, in the background, killing hundreds, while this group of people struggled to survive. It also made the scenes that the monster did appear in, more epic. The helicopter scene towards the end was breathtaking. The way the monster was filmed as the helicopter took off just so looked so natural and realistic.
 
:lol: This guy makes some good points.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/080122&sportCat=nfl

"Hey Guys, I've Got An Idea, Let's Run Directly Toward the Monster!"

OK, to watch a monster movie, you must suspend disbelief about the idea of 500-foot-tall sea monsters. But if there were such beasts, wouldn't they be subject to laws of physics and principles of biology? Almost no explanation is given for the ultra-huge creature in "Cloverfield," except a hint that it was disturbed by a deep-seabed experiment. So it's a 100,000-ton sea-floor thing; Godzilla was said to weigh 20,000 tons, and the "Cloverfield" monster is a lot bigger. If this creature lived at the bottom of the ocean, why is it adapted to the substantially different pressure of the surface? Deep-sea creatures would die rapidly if brought to the surface, yet the "Cloverfield" beast strolls around Manhattan. How come the sea monster has lungs and breathes air? The creature must be an amphibian, or it could not leave the water. To possess lungs, part of its life cycle would need to occur on land, and a 100,000-ton living object in intertidal areas would, at some point in history, have been noticed.

Even if you accept the monster-existence premise, other aspects of the movie defy reason. Two million people live in Manhattan; the monster kills all but a handful in a single night -- near the end of the film, rescue teams are taking out individual survivors by helicopter. Even knocking over skyscrapers wouldn't kill everyone on Manhattan in a single night, the majority would survive. (Awful as the Dresden raid was, most residents survived it.) The monster attack starts about 10 p.m., and by about midnight, significant military forces are in the city. How did they get there so fast? If an actual sea monster attacked a city, initially, police officers would fight it; hours would pass before military units arrived. The movie characters are trying to cross the Hudson and East rivers to get off Manhattan, but why is being in Brooklyn or Hoboken any safer with a 100,000-ton amphibian right nearby? Then, at dawn, the military destroys Manhattan to ensure the monster is dead. It is inconceivable a mere eight hours could pass from the very first news that monsters exist to a presidential decision to bomb the nation's largest city. Even if you accept the premise of a 500-foot-tall amphibian that has never been noticed by anyone in all of human history, the rest of the movie should make sense.
 
Cloverfield was shit imo, and it made my gf sick so she probably thinks of it worse
 
I think he only has access to the football forums Weaste.

So when are you getting your old job back then?
 
MrMarcello said:
:lol: This guy makes some good points.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/080122&sportCat=nfl

"Hey Guys, I've Got An Idea, Let's Run Directly Toward the Monster!"

OK, to watch a monster movie, you must suspend disbelief about the idea of 500-foot-tall sea monsters. But if there were such beasts, wouldn't they be subject to laws of physics and principles of biology? Almost no explanation is given for the ultra-huge creature in "Cloverfield," except a hint that it was disturbed by a deep-seabed experiment. So it's a 100,000-ton sea-floor thing; Godzilla was said to weigh 20,000 tons, and the "Cloverfield" monster is a lot bigger. If this creature lived at the bottom of the ocean, why is it adapted to the substantially different pressure of the surface? Deep-sea creatures would die rapidly if brought to the surface, yet the "Cloverfield" beast strolls around Manhattan. How come the sea monster has lungs and breathes air? The creature must be an amphibian, or it could not leave the water. To possess lungs, part of its life cycle would need to occur on land, and a 100,000-ton living object in intertidal areas would, at some point in history, have been noticed.

Even if you accept the monster-existence premise, other aspects of the movie defy reason. Two million people live in Manhattan; the monster kills all but a handful in a single night -- near the end of the film, rescue teams are taking out individual survivors by helicopter. Even knocking over skyscrapers wouldn't kill everyone on Manhattan in a single night, the majority would survive. (Awful as the Dresden raid was, most residents survived it.) The monster attack starts about 10 p.m., and by about midnight, significant military forces are in the city. How did they get there so fast? If an actual sea monster attacked a city, initially, police officers would fight it; hours would pass before military units arrived. The movie characters are trying to cross the Hudson and East rivers to get off Manhattan, but why is being in Brooklyn or Hoboken any safer with a 100,000-ton amphibian right nearby? Then, at dawn, the military destroys Manhattan to ensure the monster is dead. It is inconceivable a mere eight hours could pass from the very first news that monsters exist to a presidential decision to bomb the nation's largest city. Even if you accept the premise of a 500-foot-tall amphibian that has never been noticed by anyone in all of human history, the rest of the movie should make sense.
Click to expand...

You know its just a movie, right?
 
fecking excellent film, i hadnt heard much about it other than a monster running around destroying New York, i went in not knowing what to expect, i walked out thinking how fecking great the film was. I would definitly pay the 6 quid to watch this at the cinema rather than downloading a shady copy.

Keeps you on the edge of your seat from about 10 minutes in to the final whistle, no letting up and really makes you feel like your one of the people trying to avoid geting stomped on, first nice movie suprise of 2008 :)
 
MrMarcello said:
:lol: This guy makes some good points.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/080122&sportCat=nfl

"Hey Guys, I've Got An Idea, Let's Run Directly Toward the Monster!"

OK, to watch a monster movie, you must suspend disbelief about the idea of 500-foot-tall sea monsters. But if there were such beasts, wouldn't they be subject to laws of physics and principles of biology? Almost no explanation is given for the ultra-huge creature in "Cloverfield," except a hint that it was disturbed by a deep-seabed experiment. So it's a 100,000-ton sea-floor thing; Godzilla was said to weigh 20,000 tons, and the "Cloverfield" monster is a lot bigger. If this creature lived at the bottom of the ocean, why is it adapted to the substantially different pressure of the surface? Deep-sea creatures would die rapidly if brought to the surface, yet the "Cloverfield" beast strolls around Manhattan. How come the sea monster has lungs and breathes air? The creature must be an amphibian, or it could not leave the water. To possess lungs, part of its life cycle would need to occur on land, and a 100,000-ton living object in intertidal areas would, at some point in history, have been noticed.

Even if you accept the monster-existence premise, other aspects of the movie defy reason. Two million people live in Manhattan; the monster kills all but a handful in a single night -- near the end of the film, rescue teams are taking out individual survivors by helicopter. Even knocking over skyscrapers wouldn't kill everyone on Manhattan in a single night, the majority would survive. (Awful as the Dresden raid was, most residents survived it.) The monster attack starts about 10 p.m., and by about midnight, significant military forces are in the city. How did they get there so fast? If an actual sea monster attacked a city, initially, police officers would fight it; hours would pass before military units arrived. The movie characters are trying to cross the Hudson and East rivers to get off Manhattan, but why is being in Brooklyn or Hoboken any safer with a 100,000-ton amphibian right nearby? Then, at dawn, the military destroys Manhattan to ensure the monster is dead. It is inconceivable a mere eight hours could pass from the very first news that monsters exist to a presidential decision to bomb the nation's largest city. Even if you accept the premise of a 500-foot-tall amphibian that has never been noticed by anyone in all of human history, the rest of the movie should make sense.
Click to expand...

He doesn't really make good points. Almost that entire piece is based on slagging off the science of how a huge creature like that could live at the bottom of the sea and not be noticed, but there's no actual evidence that it came from the bottom of the sea. He's just chosen that as a possible reason, said why it doesn't work and then blamed the science of the film for it.

I reckon the monster grew out of some fungus in a little girl's slipper in Iowa, and then burrowed through the ground following a pixie until it appeared in Manhatten. But obviously that makes no real sense, and since the science doesn't work if it had grown in a slipper and then tunnelled hundreds of miles the film must therefore suck.

And the bit about everyone dying, well, when you watch the film you'll realise that most of the deaths arn't actually the monster itself.
 
MrMarcello said:
:lol: This guy makes some good points.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/080122&sportCat=nfl

"Hey Guys, I've Got An Idea, Let's Run Directly Toward the Monster!"

OK, to watch a monster movie, you must suspend disbelief about the idea of 500-foot-tall sea monsters. But if there were such beasts, wouldn't they be subject to laws of physics and principles of biology? Almost no explanation is given for the ultra-huge creature in "Cloverfield," except a hint that it was disturbed by a deep-seabed experiment. So it's a 100,000-ton sea-floor thing; Godzilla was said to weigh 20,000 tons, and the "Cloverfield" monster is a lot bigger. If this creature lived at the bottom of the ocean, why is it adapted to the substantially different pressure of the surface? Deep-sea creatures would die rapidly if brought to the surface, yet the "Cloverfield" beast strolls around Manhattan. How come the sea monster has lungs and breathes air? The creature must be an amphibian, or it could not leave the water. To possess lungs, part of its life cycle would need to occur on land, and a 100,000-ton living object in intertidal areas would, at some point in history, have been noticed.

Even if you accept the monster-existence premise, other aspects of the movie defy reason. Two million people live in Manhattan; the monster kills all but a handful in a single night -- near the end of the film, rescue teams are taking out individual survivors by helicopter. Even knocking over skyscrapers wouldn't kill everyone on Manhattan in a single night, the majority would survive. (Awful as the Dresden raid was, most residents survived it.) The monster attack starts about 10 p.m., and by about midnight, significant military forces are in the city. How did they get there so fast? If an actual sea monster attacked a city, initially, police officers would fight it; hours would pass before military units arrived. The movie characters are trying to cross the Hudson and East rivers to get off Manhattan, but why is being in Brooklyn or Hoboken any safer with a 100,000-ton amphibian right nearby? Then, at dawn, the military destroys Manhattan to ensure the monster is dead. It is inconceivable a mere eight hours could pass from the very first news that monsters exist to a presidential decision to bomb the nation's largest city. Even if you accept the premise of a 500-foot-tall amphibian that has never been noticed by anyone in all of human history, the rest of the movie should make sense.
Click to expand...

Id hate to sit beside this cnut in the cinema, he'd be tutting and analyzing every scene. feck off!
 
Just seen it myself - fecking AMAZING...

Every other word I whispered to my friends was "feck!" I seriously couldnt believe how good that movie was...
 
the girlfriend hated it and i loved it, 2 essential criteria for a good film!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.