Forums » The Lounge » Read Thread

Okay here's the deal I saw Cloverfield recently, and it was possibly the best movie I have seen in a LONG time.  And so I'm starting this post up for just general discussion about the movie.  Also reading this post before seeing the movie is probably not a good Idea, as it'll ruin the experience of seeing the movie for you.

To start off the discussion i wanna talk about the splash at the end of the movie, in the beach scene.  I have a detailed rumored story that i scavenged off the internet, that i'll post if some one wants but it's really long, and i really just wanna know what other people think about it.

I guess it was supposed to be the satellite that woke up the monster... But I don't know.  I saw the movie, but I didn't notice it.  I was too busy worrying on whether or not it was really over.  Weak ending, I think.

I didn't notice it either, from the things I've seen on youtube, it's small enough that anything that isn't the original quality, you can't see it.

Also I'd have to disagree, I thought the ending was PERFECT.

Side note:  From what I hear if there is a sequel they aren't gonna rush to get it done, it won't be a disappointing scam to make more money, they're actually gonna try to make it good.

The tragic -love-story ending.. Eh, I thought it was kinda cliche... But that's just me, I guess.  I expected a little more.  I didn't believe that that was the end!.. but it was.

Yeah, I heard that too, for the point of view of the guy Hud sees on the bridge. 

I thought it was very well done. Especially for a horror film.

I didn't like the monster killing Hud at the end, though. That felt like a) they needed to show off the full monster, which was a poor decision anyway and b) they had to maintain the fiction of carrying the camera. For the most part, they did a good job of not making it seem weird or forced that Hud was taking film of everything, but the ending kinda seemed contrived. As if they knew that was the ending they wanted and had to figure out a reason for it to go that way. Why couldn't Hud just die in the heli crash? Again, no need to "show off" the monster.

Also, I thought there would be more of a reveal in the backtape. There wasn't really a story there, just bits of a fun day they had. I mean, with all the talk about how they had that day together and then he never called her (he is a jerk, btw) I thought the tapestory would tell us more. Either explain sort of why he didn't call her back or at least have some kind of secret about them that gives us a new viewpoint into their relationship. I mean, it's the guy from Lost and Alias, right? (Yeah, the splash in the background, but that's pretty weak if you ask me.)

I just realized all this might make it seem as though I didn't like the movie. I really did like it quite a bit. Not on my top ten list, sure, but definitely better than a lot of movies I've seen.

No offense seth, but I'll have to disagree with you on most of your points.

I agree that there was no need to show off the monster as you said but if you look at it, Hud was the thing keeping them going, after he died they just lost hope, if Hud had died in the heli crash, they would have just lost it and ran, most likely leaving the camera there, but with hud still there they had the experience of seeing the cloverfield that resulted from the bombs.  With the monster eating Hud it shows how they don't have any peace going on, it's all out chaos.

also the backtape was just a normal day, it was showing that there was no warning, it goes from peace to chaos in an instant.  Also the reason Rob didn't call Beth back was because he was leaving, he felt guilty and knew that it wouldn't work out.

And as for the splash, I was kinda disappointed and exited when I heard about it, What I liked about the movie was that it didn't tell you how it (the monster attacking) started or ended.

Also you might not want to take my comments to seriously because there's a good chance that i'll defend every aspect of the movie, even if i shouldn't

I really like that movie top 3 for me

"experience of seeing the cloverfield that resulted from the bombs." -- What do you mean by this?

Haha, nevertheless, it was a good movie.  I may even watch it again, but not till I can see it in the dollar theater. 

I guess it makes sense that they didn't reveal too much about the monster, because they weren't really expecting it.  They were just chillin' out at a party, and suddenly *boom*, you know.  They're obviously not trying to get close to the thing.  Hopefully, the next movie will give a little more depth to it.

Clovers often grow after an area is bombed, one of the reasons the movie was titled "Cloverfield"

Oh... Haha, no... They named it that for one reason, and one reason only.  This is verified:

The directer pretty much just wanted any old name, so he asked some one, "Hey, what street are we on?"  The guy told him, "Cloverdale," but he was misunderstood for "Cloverfield." Thus, the title was born.

That's the only reason it was tittled that, unfortunately.

oh well then it was either incorporated after, or just a coincidence, if number two just ignore this whole conversation

I think they were really trying not to give away hardly anything about the movie in the trailers, etc. (There may be one too many negatives in that sentence- or one too few.)

There's no reason why, if Hud died in the heli, that (can't remember the main guy's name. . . that's usually not a good thing for a film) couldn't have picked up the camera, just like he did after Hud was semi-eaten. (And yet the camera was miraculously okay. . .)

I didn't really like. i mean it was a good movie but I didn't like it being in the view of the camera.

I did have to close my eyes for a minute a couple of times. Some people are more sensitive to that kind of camera work than others.

The camera movement didn't bother me at all.

...It didn't? O.o

I don't see how that's possible.  Unless your used to that sort of movement... Are you some sorta cameraman yourself?

Hah i film crappy home videos with my friends some times, but no not really, I only really get bothered when it's just shaking as if it were vibrating, the shakes in this were big enough that it didn't bother me (does any of that make sense?)

"...shakes in this were big enough that..."  --The "were" part kinda didn't.  Other then that, I think it's okay.  But I gotcha.

The movie was great, directing was brilliant, and the lack of closure made it all the more realistic.

The lack of music at the end really creeped out my friends, and the fact there was no soundtrack for pretty much the whole movie, save a song at the party, was just ultra clever.

Great great movie.

Wow, so I'm pretty much obsessed with this movie, I'm planning on seeing it a second time with all of my friends on friday.
Paying another 7 dollars to see this movie...Wow