Cloverfield director talks sequel

patrickJan 28th, 2008 - 19:37:35

the movie was original to say the least, kindof wish they had cleared up a few more things, though www.kogmedia.com

Report this comment

qwertyFeb 5th, 2008 - 22:28:28

i saw the movie a couple days ago and am still freakin out about how insanely awesome it was. the monster was super cool and not the typical things you see in the theaters. i dont no wat peple talk about motion sickness. i thought the movin camra thing was one of the things that made movie awesome. good acting by people ive never really heard of, some funny jokes, and an ending that i actually liked a lot. 10 out of 10

Report this comment

DowellyFeb 6th, 2008 - 12:44:04

People who say that this movie is below par obviously think of themselves as critics. Those who say it was a good entertaining film are obviously film lovers!

What's not to like...really?
OK, so the story of 'something' attacking a big city is not origional, but what is in this day? It takes something special to be origional and even then people have comparisons with other films or stories. It was a good effort and very enjoyable! I don't think anyone left the full cinema dissapointed.

The people who don't like this film must explain why it was only mediocre or worse. That may be your opinion but you have to have something to back it up and something the majority of people can agree on. Not just because you didn't like it! why didn't you like it?

As for these so called indie mags who like to review films, well they most often try to find every little thing wrong with a film(just like some might point out bad spelling or gramma in a review!).
This is why most of these mags/papers are still indie and not mainstream! - It's cool to be indie? Nope, it just means you don't sell as much because most people don't want to read how bad a film is before they see it, they want to make up their own mind. And if it means writting about how many good points a bad film has, then so be it. If I read about how may bad things are in a film, or how bad it is in general then I'm less likely to see it. I will probably wait until it's on cable or something. Other people will just download it illegally, why pay for something that might be a waste of money?

So to stop this type of thing you get a lot of mags and papers who are very pro-film, but what's wrong with that in the end?

This film was good.
I don't think I could watch it twice, but same goes for a few films.
Cloverfield thrives on impact and terror. This is all but lost on the second go round because you know what's going to happen.
The effects where decent, the sound was really effective and the whole concept was good.
I enjoyed it and the only reason I can see why other people might not like it is because they don't like monster-thriller-sci-fi type films. If that's the case then why see it in the first place?
You should watch this in the cinema for the full effect.
I dont think it will be the same on DVD at all.
good film though.

Report this comment

Digital JediFeb 10th, 2008 - 10:23:19

Don't rag on the people who got motion sickness. That can't be helped and had nothing to do with whether they liked the movie or not. I got nauseous and came home with a headache, and I still think Cloverfield was one of the most original and awesome films I've ever seen. I had a great time in spite of my sickness and am looking forward to seeing it again. (This time I wont see it on an empty stomach.) Motion Sickness is not something you choose to happen. It's something your mind does, when your eyes think your body should be moving and it isn't.

Also, just because you didn't like the movie, doesn't mean 2 hours of your life were wasted. I doubt you were going to make any great contributions to science in those 2 hours otherwise. What you should be willing to realize is that this was an innovative film, that isn't necessarily everyone's cup of tea. That doesn't mean it isn't a good movie, any more then me not liking Gone with Wind or Casablanca makes them bad movies. It's a matter of what you like, and what your tastes are. Just because you hate Italian food, doesn't mean Lasagna sucks.

You also can't go to a film with the wrong expectations. I don't' care what you think, character development in a monster movie would just be moronic. This wasn't any different then the footage we saw of documentary crew who just happened to be riding with some Firemen when 9/11 hit. You didn't see any character development, what you saw was frightened people trying to deal with extraordinary circumstances. Not people sitting around espousing the whys and wheres of their personality. It would make absolutely no sense in the context of this kind of film, any more then it would to have a giant lizard come rampaging through an episode of the Hills. (However pleasant that might be.)

Report this comment