Click here for Done Deal Pro home page

Done Deal Pro Home Page

Loading

Go Back   Done Deal Pro Forums > Movies & Television > Films
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-27-2008, 05:33 AM   #181
Fortean
Member
 
Fortean's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,140
Default Cloverfield

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goon Squad View Post
TJ Miller summed up this movie pretty well in an interview. He said in monster movies, there's always the anonymous nobody who points to the sky and shouts "GODZILLA!" and runs away and is never seen again. This is the movie about what happens to that guy. I like that a lot.

And who cares where the monster came from?
No, this is about the guy, who, after seeing Godzilla, decides to return to downtown Tokyo in response to a telephone message from an ex-girlfriend who needs to be rescued. And, his dumb friends decide to join him on his suicidal quest, before the "Atomic Breath" toasts everything.

The writer and producer vex those of us who wonder about the nature of this monster, (much as Hamlet feigned madness to a vexed Polonius by pointing to a cloud, which he said was "like a whale"). No scientist explains its nature, in this film, thus, no explanation is necessary. Its rampage, tremendous size, immunity to injury, etc. have no bearing on the story, (they say). In my view, if one wants to make an American version of Godzilla, (without admitting to its being a tawdry imitation), one claims that the monster's origins are unknown and irrelevant to the story, (like the origins of the current conflict in Iraq). Some people really don't care to know about its logic and origins, they're only concerned that they're not winning the fight.
Fortean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2008, 05:36 AM   #182
Terrance Mulloy
Member
 
Terrance Mulloy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,661
Default Re: "Cloverfield"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakkal View Post
I have to go with Bob on this one. The party was one of my gripes (nothing interesting happened/things took too long to get started).

The fact that this is a tape recovered from a camcorder doesn't excuse the filmmakers from putting in a 15min snore of a scene of someone going around with the camera at a party just because "ppl do that with camcorders." The idea (at least I think it was) was to tell a good cinematic story through the pov cam gimmick. In that framework, I don't think the party scene works. The filmmakers can get away with it a little due to the pov gimmick, but, had this been shot conventionally, the drawbacks of such a long, monotonous scene would have been painfully obvious.

Imho, at least.
Yeah, but how else would they have into'd the characters? I mean, the party was a set-up. I can't imagine how the bad the film would have been if we were just thrown into the meat of the story.
__________________
@TerranceMulloy
Terrance Mulloy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2008, 06:10 AM   #183
Jakkal
Member
 
Jakkal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 789
Default Re: "Cloverfield"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Terrance Mulloy View Post
Yeah, but how else would they have into'd the characters? I mean, the party was a set-up. I can't imagine how the bad the film would have been if we were just thrown into the meat of the story.
Well, there are really only 4 characters we follow throughout the film, Rob, Hud, Hud's crush, and Rob's sister-in-law. Since Rob isn't at the party until later, there are only 3 characters that need to be introduced. Hud and Hud's crush are done nicely with the whole awkward hitting on. For Rob's sister-in-law, I could've done without the talking to the camera. I mean, all she ever did was bitch and worry about everything being perfect and that was transmitted before the party as she bitched at her boyfriend about preparations and when she asked Hud why was he filming the party and not her boyfriend, as she had requested. No need for a long-winded "goodbye" to Rob where she bitches, again, that Hud didn't film it right. Introducing these three people in those two or three scenes at the party doesn't need to take 15 min.

I'm not saying nix the party scene. I'm just saying it went on for way too long and did too little. Reveal character and develop story, remember? That scene was all about character (if the real story is Rob's relationship with his crush, that doesn't start developing until he and she get to the party. Before that, why are we even watching all these people be....people?)
Jakkal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2008, 06:14 AM   #184
tabula rasa
Member
 
tabula rasa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 'The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.' Milton(1667)
Posts: 1,864
Default Re: "Cloverfield"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Terrance Mulloy View Post


Just the response I was expecting from you Tab. Long-winded and badly formatted.

If it's 'long winded' ... maybe that's because I bother to offer my thinking behind my thoughts. (That way, folks can understand WHY they don't agree with me, and offer an intelligent response)

I don't just throw out blind hostile personality jabs just because someone doesn't share my opinion or taste.



And I'll also bother to point out that you calling a reply 'long-winded' and 'badly formatted' ... once again fails to rebut my points.

I could be long-winded, badly-formatted -- and still be 100% correct.

I can understand someone not wanting to rebut my points, it's okay.

It seems pointless for you to REPLY ... and still not say anything to the point. No, wait, your reply is pointless! Ha! I understand!

I honestly haven't got time to dissect your response, but by all means, go ahead and dissect mine, as you so elequently do.

I really don't think of myself as 'dissecting' your comments. It's more like ... doing exploratory surgery in hopes of finding out what's gone wrong and hoping for a cure!
Thanks. Felt good. Glad you found 'time' to reply to other ones!

You seem oddly defensive (imo) about CLOVERFIELD here.

It's not like the end of the world if folks don't enjoy a movie as much as you do. I only originally commented because it seemed like everyone was loving on it, overly much, and I just thought "Huh. Reality check. Is this a movie writers at DD are going gaga over? Because it's got some big ol' problems (from a story writing perspective)"

I just wanted to offer some friendly alternative viewpoints to the discussion.

"Friendly" was and should remain one of the operative words there ...
__________________

"As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world -
that is the myth of the atomic age - as in being able to remake ourselves."
-Mahatma Gandhi.

Last edited by tabula rasa : 01-27-2008 at 06:29 AM.
tabula rasa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2008, 08:14 AM   #185
Terrance Mulloy
Member
 
Terrance Mulloy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,661
Default Re: "Cloverfield"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakkal View Post
Well, there are really only 4 characters we follow throughout the film, Rob, Hud, Hud's crush, and Rob's sister-in-law. Since Rob isn't at the party until later, there are only 3 characters that need to be introduced. Hud and Hud's crush are done nicely with the whole awkward hitting on. For Rob's sister-in-law, I could've done without the talking to the camera. I mean, all she ever did was bitch and worry about everything being perfect and that was transmitted before the party as she bitched at her boyfriend about preparations and when she asked Hud why was he filming the party and not her boyfriend, as she had requested. No need for a long-winded "goodbye" to Rob where she bitches, again, that Hud didn't film it right. Introducing these three people in those two or three scenes at the party doesn't need to take 15 min.

I'm not saying nix the party scene. I'm just saying it went on for way too long and did too little. Reveal character and develop story, remember? That scene was all about character (if the real story is Rob's relationship with his crush, that doesn't start developing until he and she get to the party. Before that, why are we even watching all these people be....people?)
Yeah, I can see your points. I dig.

It's by no means perfect (then again, what film is?) but I thought it was effective given the genre and it's boundaries. Like I said earlier, these kinds of films are always highly subjective to the viewer. What scares one person may make another person laugh, etc. Personally, I found the party to be the right mix of character intro, slight conflict (love interests etc) and set up for the initial attack. I'm glad it didn't go on for any longer though, then it may have been a problem for me.

The one aspect I did find slightly annoying was that I never really felt anything for Rob and the chick he went back to save. I felt more for the exploding girl, whatever her name was. I really felt for Hud. The clumsy bufoon, who did his best to document the event. I wan't really rooting for Rob.
__________________
@TerranceMulloy
Terrance Mulloy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2008, 08:18 AM   #186
Terrance Mulloy
Member
 
Terrance Mulloy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,661
Default Re: "Cloverfield"

Quote:
Originally Posted by tabula rasa View Post
I just wanted to offer some friendly alternative viewpoints to the discussion.

"Friendly" was and should remain one of the operative words there ...
I'd say 'snide' is more like the operative word here.

Tab, you must really have a sense of self importance to think I'd try and defend a film you thought was ridiculous.

Enjoy it, I guess.
__________________
@TerranceMulloy
Terrance Mulloy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2008, 08:41 AM   #187
Terrance Mulloy
Member
 
Terrance Mulloy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,661
Default Re: "Cloverfield"

Quote:
Originally Posted by tabula rasa View Post
If it's 'long winded' ... maybe that's because I bother to offer my thinking behind my thoughts. (That way, folks can understand WHY they don't agree with me, and offer an intelligent response)


We all have opinions, and that's fine. You seem to be on this kick that I'm desperately trying to defend a film. Hardly, as I'd be nuts to try and put that much effort into something so futile. But for the record - I will say I think you don't have the faintest idea of what you're talking about - and I don't mean that from your opinions, but from the fact that you actually think they're 100% right - all the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tabula rasa View Post
I don't just throw out blind hostile personality jabs just because someone doesn't share my opinion or taste.
Blind hostile personality jabs. Nice. Where exactly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tabula rasa View Post
And I'll also bother to point out that you calling a reply 'long-winded' and 'badly formatted' ... once again fails to rebut my points.

I could be long-winded, badly-formatted -- and still be 100% correct.

I can understand someone not wanting to rebut my points, it's okay.

It seems pointless for you to REPLY ... and still not say anything to the point. No, wait, your reply is pointless! Ha! I understand!

See above comment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tabula rasa View Post
I really don't think of myself as 'dissecting' your comments. It's more like ... doing exploratory surgery in hopes of finding out what's gone wrong and hoping for a cure!


I rest my case.

Au Revoir.
__________________
@TerranceMulloy
Terrance Mulloy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2008, 08:45 AM   #188
Terrance Mulloy
Member
 
Terrance Mulloy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,661
Default Re: "Cloverfield"

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmartin66 View Post

Can you see that the last thing you said is a big red flag for screenwriters?

You didn't really care about the main character or his goal.

Bob
I can. But maybe several dozen other audience members did?

Once again, that's the subjective nature coming back into play. I just didn't feel for Rob as much as Hud.

Regardless, I still felt the film worked, and it was enjoyable.
__________________
@TerranceMulloy
Terrance Mulloy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2008, 09:17 AM   #189
winter dreams
Member
 
winter dreams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,213
Default Re: "Cloverfield"

Variety is reporting a 76% dropoff in box office for Cloverfield from last week.

Wow. I can't remember a bigger dropoff for any movie. Anyone?

It's too bad, because studios will be less inclined to take risks. There were two big risks with this film: first, the unconventional, limited POV structure, which alienated a lot of moviegoers, as this thread demonstrates; and the inconclusive ending, which I believe the filmmakers felt was necessary to pave the way for sequels -- but which took the risk of compromising the all-important, send-them-out-satisfied rule of movie endings.

Who knows whether the filmmakers will be able to capitalize on their risk when (and if) the sequel(s) come out. I hope they do. Even if you didn't like this film, you have to admire the risks the filmmakers took in pursuing their vision.

Returning to the merits of the film, some above have criticized the party scene.

I thought it was perfect. I can't imagine a more economical way to introduce all of the main characters and the protagonist's dilemma, while getting them all together in a celebratory situation that contrasts with the monster's arrival -- and accomplish this all within the limited POV of the video camera (i.e., providing a situation in which it's believable that a video camera would be recording everything).

It's amazing how polarizing this film is. Which further adds to the probability that it is great.
winter dreams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2008, 10:09 AM   #190
DramaKing
Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 261
Default Re: "Cloverfield"

The big risks for the people making this movie were a little different than what you think. The biggest risk was the lack of a star, which meant the movie had to be sold on the monster as the star which itself is dangerous since the story was clearly not intended to involve the monster. The monster was the excuse for the story, like a natural disaster, and was never intended to be the focus of it, which brings us to the second problem.

The story was shallow, flat, and heavily skewed young cosmopolitan male. There was tremendous potential for a deeply moving, or at least engaging and thrilling, universal story within the framework of its concept. Unfortunately the film did not tap into the heart of the story it wanted to tell and full exploit it. This made for a story with little to no repeat viewing quality that offered nothing to shoe not already in the core demographics who were already predisposed to see this kind of movie regardless of how good the story was.

Fortunately the companies involved know how to manage risk and made this movie so cheap that it has already accomplished what it needed to accomplish at the box office. It will do what it needs to do in rentals and everyone involved will continue to be very happy with the results.

This movie is a triumph of marketing over substance which is why it had a strong opening weekend and there was a precipitous drop at the box office the second weekend.
DramaKing is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Done Deal Pro

eXTReMe Tracker