View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
RACETRAITOR
Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's really all I care about too. The Internet is filled with speculative pictures. I really wish they went with the gigantic mutated whale.
The only source I've found is a series of sketches as described by people who saw the movie. Apparently it looks radically different in each scene.
Here's a place to start.
http://www.horror-movies.ca/horror_9053.html |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've seen those sketches also. Don't know if it's the real thing tho. Just kind of wondering if anyone has seen the movie?
I saw this but I don't know if has anything to do with the film. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
peppermint

Joined: 13 May 2003 Location: traversing the minefields of caddishness.
|
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I did, thought it exploited 9/11 a bit much, and the handicam thing made a couple of people in the theatre audibly nauseous. Effectively scary though.
I'll post monster description in the next post, as it will be easier to hide the spoiler on a light background |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
peppermint

Joined: 13 May 2003 Location: traversing the minefields of caddishness.
|
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
You don't never really see the whole monster, just bits of it thudding around buildings etc, but I'll describe what I can below ( highlight if you want to know)
There are two monsters: giant (german shepherd sized) spidery things that fall off the main body, and have an infectious bite.
The main monster is skyscraper sized, vaguely godzilla like, but grey, and with a pointy head and a lot of teeth, oddly gentle looking hands( no claws) |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Young FRANKenstein

Joined: 02 Oct 2006 Location: Castle Frankenstein (that's FRONKensteen)
|
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
What a piece of shit movie, made worse by the fact that I saw Monster only hours before. I got a headache from all the jiggly camera shots. I may as well have watched my home movies from Disneyworld as I filmed myself going on Space Mountain. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Craven Moorehead

Joined: 14 Jan 2006
|
Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Saw it this evening and was a huge fan. My girlfriend unfortunately only saw about half of it because of the first person cinematography. She had her eyes closed for a lot of it, afraid she was going to have to leave because of nausea.
As hard to believe as it is, Orson Welles' first film was supposed to have been a first person account of Heart of Darkness. That fell through and we were left with Citizen Kane, which ain't bad. Not that I am comparing Matt Reeves' work to that of Welles, but I guarantee an audience in the 40s was not ready for such radically new filmmaking. They had a hard enough time with Kane's timeline switches, flashbacks etc. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Bibbitybop

Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 6:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
I saw it tonight, it was good and worth the 8,000 won.
Spoiler:
Peppermint, you see the whole monster quite a few times in the movie, especially at the end when they catch a ride with the superman-like character in his kangaroo pouch.
Also, at the end of the movie, when it shows the old footage, you see the ocean. Something falls out of the sky and splashed into the ocean. My friend didn't see it.
I got online and there are other people who saw the same thing fall out of the sky. I also learned there is a huge Internet-marketing story about Japanese companies, a drink called Slusho, a drilling company and the possible origins of Cloverfield. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Jarome_Turner

Joined: 10 Sep 2004
|
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just got back. Was a little disappointed.... the entire movie clocked in at a whopping 70 minutes. Jesus. I felt like asking for half my money back.
There were some cool parts, like when they were going through the tunnels, and when they were taking Beth out of her building and they were looking at the moster from the top. The helicopter scene was cool too. They easily could have added another 30 minutes-ish tho. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 2:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
70 minutes? Here in Hong Kong, it's 85 minutes. I enjoyed the flick, though now I wonder what the Korean film censors decided had to be cut. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Jarome_Turner

Joined: 10 Sep 2004
|
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
CentralCali wrote: |
70 minutes? Here in Hong Kong, it's 85 minutes. I enjoyed the flick, though now I wonder what the Korean film censors decided had to be cut. |
Now that I think about it... it was closer to 80 minutes maybe? Either way, too kcufing short. Now that I've had a few hours to digest it, I think I enjoyed it more than I originally thought. It helps that I just finished watching The Day After Tomorow, which is downright dogsh1t. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
CentralCali wrote: |
70 minutes? Here in Hong Kong, it's 85 minutes. I enjoyed the flick, though now I wonder what the Korean film censors decided had to be cut. |
85 but that includes the credits. Which I think clock in at a good 10 minutes. Movie started at 7:25 and I was out about 8:40, without watching the full credits.
Like the other poster, my gf couldn't much hack the cin�ma-v�rit�. She told me to meet her in the lobby and walked out before they got on the chopper.
I think we already suspended disbelief in the idea of the monster being able to withstand 120 mm sabots from an M1, TOW missiles, and direct hits from B2 Mk82 JDAMs. We could suspend some disbelief for oddly steady camera work when going handheld. Crap, maybe they got their friend with a steadycam to do the party?
I think they could have kept up the unseen monster part a bit more. That was working well. That's always the best part. More news clips. That would have been cool. The blacks looting? Hrm. And people go bug nutty when Disney heavies are animals with darker fur. Maybe they were trying to make a point. When the hero went to loot a battery, he wasn't looting. Like the white people weren't looting bread during Katrina.
And I would have not gone back for that bimbo.
Dude, you're soon to be a foreign biz exec in Japan. She's gonna look like a big nosed cow to you 2 weeks after you step foot in Japan. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Craven Moorehead

Joined: 14 Jan 2006
|
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
mindmetoo wrote: |
Like the other poster, my gf couldn't much hack the cin�ma-v�rit�. |
Being a pedantic film student, I have to respectfully disagree with your use of the term cinema-verite. While Cloverfield was shot with relatively inexpensive, portable equipment, this is the only thing the movie has in common with cinema verite.
Cinema-verite would use actual locations, real people as opposed to actors, and a small (or non-existent) budget. These films are also usually shot without scripts, and are not meant to appeal to mass audiences. Cinema verite draws very heavily on the artisitc movement known as realism, and while Cloverfield successfully blends fantastic elements with a verite approach to the cinematography, that ain't cinema verite.
And that's my two cents. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Spoilers maybe past this post...
Anyone want to speculate about the monster and sequel? I thought they did a reasonable job of handling the "oh c'mon where'd that come from?" with the reference to the coelacanth. Appears to have come out of the ocean as the ship was turned over.
The "bite" thing made me think it might turn into a bit of a zombie movie. Why'd they isolate her so quickly? What exploded? Did an alien pop out of her?
Where do the little godzillas come from? Does the big one shed them? Are they symbiote? The big monster is going to turn up a lot of food. Or they are the same species. The big one churns up the hosts, the little ones use them to reproduce. If a big one gets killed, a little one quickly expands to take its place (hence why they had a very hard time killing it).
Sequel? Lets see Blair Witch spawned a sequel that some generic goth horror script with "Night of Goth Horror" find | replaced with "Blair Witch 2". I'm sure we'd get something similar. That sucks. A $30 million dollar little film becomes a $300 million dollar part 2 that sucks.
You're going to want to find out where it came from and kill the hive. I guess you could do a documentary format based on that.
Last edited by mindmetoo on Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:37 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Craven Moorehead wrote: |
mindmetoo wrote: |
Like the other poster, my gf couldn't much hack the cin�ma-v�rit�. |
Being a pedantic film student, I have to respectfully disagree with your use of the term cinema-verite. |
Cin�ma-v�rit� isn't just french for "shaky camera"? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|