[gbk33]

Ahhh, things look to be taking a turn for the positive.

[jayhawk]

hey PP, wb!

I enjoyed it, just because it was different.

Don't underestimate how fast a military response can be formed in NYC after 911. In orlando we could have one in minutes if there was every terrorist activity in the theme parks, so I'm sure NYC has something better now

[true]

I still don't know what the monster looks like lol
Anyone with pics...

[the_dark_knight]

I heard alot of people say that the whole hand held camera thing was annoying

[zantasha]

Originally Posted by gbk33

Ahhh, things look to be taking a turn for the positive.

So now start a thread :Cloverfield Didn't Suck Ass"

well after reading pp's review i decided not to waste my time but last night my friends forced me and i watched it. Personally still i'm not a very big fan of the movie, but tbh it's watchable and rather enjoyable but only once in life kinda movie. i can't watch it gain. and i agree with the_dark_knight about that shaking camera. it was really annoying .

[hmarx]

Saw this post on IMDB and thought it was funny about the nay sayers. Enjoy!

A great by-product of Cloverfield is that it reveals just how intellectually lazy people have become in our culture. Just read these negative reviews on this site alone and the reasons they give. Now I don't mind if people don't like the movie, but the reasons they give are truly ridiculous and embarrassing. For example, people are whining that "No one was there to tell me where the monster came from!!! And I didn't like that!!!" It just goes to show you just how dumbed down movies have to be to please the general public. Take note filmmakers, remember to spoon feed everything to your audience. God forbid they have to use their imagination or be forced to think in any way.

Another complaint is that it was shot with a hand held camcorder and it was "too shaky" for them. Oh, you poor, poor dear. Next time stick to Disney films, you knew exactly what you were getting into with this one. It was done strictly to be consistent with the overall theme that it was government confiscated footage from a civilian AND it also enhances the overall effect of CGI graphics. It's a great combination and the effect was very compelling.

People also seem to have issues with the camcorder's battery apparently lasting a bit too long for their ultra "logical brains." Somehow a battery lasting around 70 minutes is a little too hard for them to believe. "How can the filmmakers have made such a huge mistake! Why didn't they show Hud replacing the battery sometime in the movie so that we can feel better?" You guys crack me up.

People are also complaining that they couldn't "empathize" with the characters. I empathized with them very easily. Why? Because I don't need to be spoon fed and told when I'm supposed to relate to characters. I thought the acting was superb and quite believable. I wonder why so many people need someone to hold their hand and walk them through minute by minute of a movie?

The Love Story. People are having a hard time suspending belief that the two main characters were in love after only sleeping together once, yet have no problem believing characters in other movies could fall in love without sleeping with each other at all. I think I'm going to call this "IMDb Logic." They also are having a hard time believing that the main characters friends wanted to come with him to help him find his girl trapped in her apartment. Is it really so hard to believe that friends tend to help each other? Jesus, I wonder what kind of friends some of you have that leads to your world view of friendship.

Oh, let's not forget the complaint that there wasn't any music in the film to help guide your emotions. Because everyone knows that when you make home videos on a camcorder they all automatically come with an accompanying soundtrack. (Uh, remember that this is supposed to be government confiscated amateur footage.) Oh, the girl they rescued in the leaning high rise tower with the rod through her shoulder. I had no problem with that, I was willing to suspend belief for the sake of the love story. And I'm sure people have survived worse injuries than that.

Anyway, I just find all this whining over the movie hilarious. People are complaining that they were "cheated" out of their hard earned (I'm sure) $9.00. And I find it fascinating. I really enjoyed the film. I was on edge for the whole movie. I thought it was very well done and perfectly executed, including the monster. I never cared that it wasn't explained where it came from. Who cares? I thought it was cool not having that information. It actually (are you ready for this IMDb critics?) *cough* sparks your imagination! Oh my god! What a concept! So to summarize, if you're the type of intellectual lightweight who has to be spoon fed everything and has to have someone hold your hand as you walk through life, you're going to hate this movie. If you've got an open mind and appreciate different approaches to film and do not require a movie to tell you what you're supposed to be thinking, then you'll probably like the film.

[donobieus]

Somebody should go back to IMDB and tell that pompous ass to get off his soapbox and stop telling people that they're "dumbed down" just because he liked a movie that a lot of other people didnt like. A simple "i really liked Cloverfield because:" would've swayed me way better than preaching to me about being openminded and imaginative. He's every bit as bad as the people who talk shit on the other side of the coin.

I thought it was a watchable and entertaining flick. And just because I understood using the shaking camera throughout for the sake of continuity didnt make it any less annoying an hour into it.

[master_shake]

I'm glad you spoke your mind "hmarx", I really like CLOVERFIELD and think a lot (not all) of the critisism is pretty childish and vauge and neglects to give thought-out reasoning and all-around suspension of disbelief in being enveloped in a movie that isn't your run-of-the-mill motion picture.

[Darth Slater]

i liked it, it was better than i expected, and it should be seen in a theatre (at home it just wouldn't be the same)

[Paper Pills]

i stand by what i said. the camera action to be was indifferent. it was interesting...not annoying...but i think as i said they were too caught up in HOW they were telling the story and how cool the hand cam would be that they didn't tell a story without big plot holes or problems with how they shoot stuff.

for example, in all of the spiderman movies, if you are from nyc, you see problems with how they lay out the city, where peter goes to hgh school/college, etc, but you can look passed that because the movie is interesting and you don't care about the scenary. in cloverfield, the monster effects are just so shitty, that you immediately don't care about it. then, at least, as soon as i was let down by seeing the monster and the lack of any plausible character development...and the REALLY REALLY weak and cheesey way the scenes from the passed and the scenes from the present were intercut, you start to pay attention to everything that makes it weak.

case in point, what is the point of the beginning when they are setting up for the party...except to ground the story...NONE. so...the question becomes why even do it. the film should have started at the party...no back story. the half-assed attempt to give it a back story is a problem for me. next....why intercut scene from coney island at all. if they stopped recording, what made the tape advance each time...once they stopped recording, there should have been a rough cut to when they started recording again...not a scene from the passed. WEAK ASSED attempted to give more back story.

hey...i know that very few people will be as critical as i am being, but this movie was clear to me from the first few min.....a bunch of people that were so happy with what they were doing because they thought they were innovative and edgy, that they unfortunately didn't stop to think if they plugged all the holes in it.

when it all comes down to it...for me...it was a run-of-the mill movie that tried too hard to be what it couldn't be.