Cloverfield is out on DVD today

Please no spoilers for those of who seen the movie already...

So what do you think, is this movie a Rental or a Buy?

wow so early

it only came out in jan?

Utter Rubbish ... felt like it was filmed by media students Jonny_Grey

I'd like to meet these media students who could make the CGI in the movie, and pull off New York in mass panic in the middle of the night..

wow so early

it only came out in jan?

solidgamer

Ya usually when that happens it means the movie was garbage!

[QUOTE="Jonny_Grey"]Utter Rubbish ... felt like it was filmed by media students sSubZerOo

I'd like to meet these media students who could make the CGI in the movie, and pull off New York in mass panic in the middle of the night..

[QUOTE="solidgamer"]

wow so early

it only came out in jan?

xscrapzx

Ya usually when that happens it means the movie was garbage!

It got 80 million in the US box office... And critics like Ebert loved it.

sSubZero

Its easy ,lol use any cgi progs , it aint that hard ,seriously ...

Utter Rubbish ... felt like it was filmed by media students Jonny_Grey

My opinion is this, but the complete opposite.

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

Premier1101

[QUOTE="xscrapzx"][QUOTE="solidgamer"]

wow so early

it only came out in jan?

sSubZerOo

Ya usually when that happens it means the movie was garbage!

It got 80 million in the US box office... And critics like Ebert loved it.

I'm just saying..... gosh...

xaos

Not trolling .....are you ?

lots of Cgi progs can do the same effects ...with the same budgets can get better scripts written I bet ,lol

[QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

cpo335

I dont feel like doing research to understand a movie, the movie should explain itself enough... cant wait to watch it though!! should I watch it at 3, or wait till 8ish???? not sure..

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

Premier1101

Was it suppose to have backstory though? The movie was suppose to be a testimony for survivors in New York during the attack.. And I don't understand how saving the girl was idiotic? The main character loved her, wouldn't you do that if some one you truly loved was hurt?

[QUOTE="cpo335"][QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

Premier1101

I dont feel like doing research to understand a movie, the movie should explain itself enough... cant wait to watch it though!! should I watch it at 3, or wait till 8ish???? not sure..

And I don't like researching things either. That's what OT is for!

It's not bad but it could have been much better. The guy with the camera was the MOST FREAKING ANNOYING PERSON EVER. He seriously ruined most of the movie. He was such a horrible actor and sounded like some idiot on some lame sitcom trying to be funny.

AHEM....kk....Now.....This is one of the years best films. Period. Why do we have to overthink/analyze everything to death?

Just watch it as a "monster movie"...Dont read between the lines.Just watch it for the entertainment factor..Instead of this,HEY YOU HAVE TO WATCH THE THIRD SHOT INSIDE THE BUILDING WHEN DA MONSTER IS EATING..HUGE SIGNIFICANCE..

[QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

sSubZerOo

Was it suppose to have backstory though? The movie was suppose to be a testimony for survivors in New York during the attack.. And I don't understand how saving the girl was idiotic? The main character loved her, wouldn't you do that if some one you truly loved was hurt?

its not that it didnt have enough backstory, it didnt have any! I understand it wasnt the movie's direction to tell us how this happened, but more info couldve been revealed...

to answer your question, he didnt know if she was alive or not. He put himself and three others at risk by going after one. That is highlighted on how dum they were when SPOILER.

.

.

.

.

They all died in the end instead of the originals leaving then and letting the girl die. They KNEW they were going to cut it close. And she may be dead anyway. I would not take the chance with others to watch for, if i was bymyself, hells yeah. But I have a responsibility to get 3 others to safety, I would do that.

Demonyxx

which film review site are you the critic for ? just so I can avoid it ,lol

Its cgi at its worst no substance whatsoever ..lol

xaos

Not trolling .....are you ?

lots of Cgi progs can do the same effects ...with the same budgets can get better scripts written I bet ,lol

Jonny_Grey

[QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="cpo335"][QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

cpo335

I dont feel like doing research to understand a movie, the movie should explain itself enough... cant wait to watch it though!! should I watch it at 3, or wait till 8ish???? not sure..

And I don't like researching things either. That's what OT is for!

I would've preferred that when they met up with military, they couldve gotten some backdrop, but alas no. Yeah, i did a little research on it unfortuanetly..

[QUOTE="Jonny_Grey"]

xaos

Not trolling .....are you ?

lots of Cgi progs can do the same effects ...with the same budgets can get better scripts written I bet ,lol

xaos

McOwned.

Demonyxx

which film review site are you the critic for ? just so I can avoid it ,lol

Its cgi at its worst no substance whatsoever ..lol

Jonny_Grey

you do know that only the monsters were CGI right? not the whole movie?

[QUOTE="cpo335"][QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="cpo335"][QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

Premier1101

I dont feel like doing research to understand a movie, the movie should explain itself enough... cant wait to watch it though!! should I watch it at 3, or wait till 8ish???? not sure..

And I don't like researching things either. That's what OT is for!

I would've preferred that when they met up with military, they couldve gotten some backdrop, but alas no. Yeah, i did a little research on it unfortuanetly..

Why would they contribute military aid to save one person, in a city that is about to be let go and hammered down by the airforce?

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

Premier1101

Was it suppose to have backstory though? The movie was suppose to be a testimony for survivors in New York during the attack.. And I don't understand how saving the girl was idiotic? The main character loved her, wouldn't you do that if some one you truly loved was hurt?

its not that it didnt have enough backstory, it didnt have any! I understand it wasnt the movie's direction to tell us how this happened, but more info couldve been revealed...

to answer your question, he didnt know if she was alive or not. He put himself and three others at risk by going after one. That is highlighted on how dum they were when SPOILER.

.

.

.

.

They all died in the end instead of the originals leaving then and letting the girl die. They KNEW they were going to cut it close. And she may be dead anyway. I would not take the chance with others to watch for, if i was bymyself, hells yeah. But I have a responsibility to get 3 others to safety, I would do that.

So what.. You seem to think its ok to let a loved one go when there is a chance they still may be alive? And the 3 came under their own power, they decided to go.. In the end I most likely would do in the exact same situation.

And no he didn't have the responsibility to get 3 others to safety they were grown adults.., They had teh choice of going but they decided to stick with him..

And it wasn't suppose to have back story. It was depicting a single event that surviors went through.. Its more for the sake of realism, that this is truly a real document record..

[QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="cpo335"][QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="cpo335"][QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

sSubZerOo

I dont feel like doing research to understand a movie, the movie should explain itself enough... cant wait to watch it though!! should I watch it at 3, or wait till 8ish???? not sure..

And I don't like researching things either. That's what OT is for!

I would've preferred that when they met up with military, they couldve gotten some backdrop, but alas no. Yeah, i did a little research on it unfortuanetly..

Why would they contribute military aid to save one person, in a city that is about to be let go and hammered down by the airforce?

nonono, i mean backdrop on the story, not reinforcements. LOL!

[QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="cpo335"][QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="cpo335"][QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

sSubZerOo

I dont feel like doing research to understand a movie, the movie should explain itself enough... cant wait to watch it though!! should I watch it at 3, or wait till 8ish???? not sure..

And I don't like researching things either. That's what OT is for!

I would've preferred that when they met up with military, they couldve gotten some backdrop, but alas no. Yeah, i did a little research on it unfortuanetly..

Why would they contribute military aid to save one person, in a city that is about to be let go and hammered down by the airforce?

But the point was supposed to be that it was completely unexpected and no one knew nothing about it.

[QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

sSubZerOo

Was it suppose to have backstory though? The movie was suppose to be a testimony for survivors in New York during the attack.. And I don't understand how saving the girl was idiotic? The main character loved her, wouldn't you do that if some one you truly loved was hurt?

its not that it didnt have enough backstory, it didnt have any! I understand it wasnt the movie's direction to tell us how this happened, but more info couldve been revealed...

to answer your question, he didnt know if she was alive or not. He put himself and three others at risk by going after one. That is highlighted on how dum they were when SPOILER.

.

.

.

.

They all died in the end instead of the originals leaving then and letting the girl die. They KNEW they were going to cut it close. And she may be dead anyway. I would not take the chance with others to watch for, if i was bymyself, hells yeah. But I have a responsibility to get 3 others to safety, I would do that.

So what.. You seem to think its ok to let a loved one go when there is a chance they still may be alive? And the 3 came under their own power, they decided to go.. In the end I most likely would do in the exact same situation.

And no he didn't have the responsibility to get 3 others to safety they were grown adults.., They had teh choice of going but they decided to stick with him..

And it wasn't suppose to have back story. It was depicting a single event that surviors went through.. Its more for the sake of realism, that this is truly a real document record..

well, the people followed him into danger and risk of time, and if he was smart, he wouldntve risked them as well as himself. They decide to folllow him, he lets them, therefore he has a responsibility to be quick so the others can get to safety.

I know, but document is a little far-fetched and not necessarily real.... but 10 bucks said the government knew how it happened, but it was never said.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="cpo335"][QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="cpo335"][QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

cpo335

I dont feel like doing research to understand a movie, the movie should explain itself enough... cant wait to watch it though!! should I watch it at 3, or wait till 8ish???? not sure..

And I don't like researching things either. That's what OT is for!

I would've preferred that when they met up with military, they couldve gotten some backdrop, but alas no. Yeah, i did a little research on it unfortuanetly..

Why would they contribute military aid to save one person, in a city that is about to be let go and hammered down by the airforce?

But the point was supposed to be that it was completely unexpected and no one knew nothing about it.

yeah but when they chatted with the colonel? maybe? I was hoping for some story.... alas there wasnt.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

Premier1101

Was it suppose to have backstory though? The movie was suppose to be a testimony for survivors in New York during the attack.. And I don't understand how saving the girl was idiotic? The main character loved her, wouldn't you do that if some one you truly loved was hurt?

its not that it didnt have enough backstory, it didnt have any! I understand it wasnt the movie's direction to tell us how this happened, but more info couldve been revealed...

to answer your question, he didnt know if she was alive or not. He put himself and three others at risk by going after one. That is highlighted on how dum they were when SPOILER.

.

.

.

.

They all died in the end instead of the originals leaving then and letting the girl die. They KNEW they were going to cut it close. And she may be dead anyway. I would not take the chance with others to watch for, if i was bymyself, hells yeah. But I have a responsibility to get 3 others to safety, I would do that.

So what.. You seem to think its ok to let a loved one go when there is a chance they still may be alive? And the 3 came under their own power, they decided to go.. In the end I most likely would do in the exact same situation.

And no he didn't have the responsibility to get 3 others to safety they were grown adults.., They had teh choice of going but they decided to stick with him..

And it wasn't suppose to have back story. It was depicting a single event that surviors went through.. Its more for the sake of realism, that this is truly a real document record..

well, the people followed him into danger and risk of time, and if he was smart, he wouldntve risked them as well as himself. They decide to folllow him, he lets them, therefore he has a responsibility to be quick so the others can get to safety.

I know, but document is a little far-fetched and not necessarily real.... but 10 bucks said the government knew how it happened, but it was never said.

helicopter and then they saw it get bombed. And when you see something get bombed, you think it's dead, but it lunged at them and took them all down (except that black girl).

[QUOTE="Jonny_Grey"]

Demonyxx

which film review site are you the critic for ? just so I can avoid it ,lol

Its cgi at its worst no substance whatsoever ..lol

Premier1101

you do know that only the monsters were CGI right? not the whole movie?

I dunno if you run any "CGI" programs or not but if you did you would know that even making ONE single frame with lighting, modeling and shader effects is no simple task. What program would you be referring to anyways, because I have some experience running a few different programs for my business? I would say even the mosters alone would take quite a while to complete givin that they are pumping out 24+ frames per second and syncing the motion up with real life film.

I wouldnt want to have to do all of it, I wouldve pulled my hair out before I finished no doubt... :P

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

Premier1101

Was it suppose to have backstory though? The movie was suppose to be a testimony for survivors in New York during the attack.. And I don't understand how saving the girl was idiotic? The main character loved her, wouldn't you do that if some one you truly loved was hurt?

its not that it didnt have enough backstory, it didnt have any! I understand it wasnt the movie's direction to tell us how this happened, but more info couldve been revealed...

to answer your question, he didnt know if she was alive or not. He put himself and three others at risk by going after one. That is highlighted on how dum they were when SPOILER.

.

.

.

.

They all died in the end instead of the originals leaving then and letting the girl die. They KNEW they were going to cut it close. And she may be dead anyway. I would not take the chance with others to watch for, if i was bymyself, hells yeah. But I have a responsibility to get 3 others to safety, I would do that.

So what.. You seem to think its ok to let a loved one go when there is a chance they still may be alive? And the 3 came under their own power, they decided to go.. In the end I most likely would do in the exact same situation.

And no he didn't have the responsibility to get 3 others to safety they were grown adults.., They had teh choice of going but they decided to stick with him..

And it wasn't suppose to have back story. It was depicting a single event that surviors went through.. Its more for the sake of realism, that this is truly a real document record..

well, the people followed him into danger and risk of time, and if he was smart, he wouldntve risked them as well as himself. They decide to folllow him, he lets them, therefore he has a responsibility to be quick so the others can get to safety.

I know, but document is a little far-fetched and not necessarily real.... but 10 bucks said the government knew how it happened, but it was never said.

The government knew nothing.. To further illustrate this, look at the last scene where its panning out on the ocean, you will see a small meteor hit the ocean in the left.. Its very hard to spot but its there, and I think I honestly was the only person who spotted it in the theaters..

Sorry that sitll doesn't make sense.. He did not hold responibility to these people.. He was not their leader, they chose to save the girl as well and help him.. I am sorry but most people under this amount of stress where possibly the most important person in their lives is in danger, will do anything to save them.

[QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="Premier1101"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="Premier1101"]

Honestly imo, Cloverfield was pretty good, but not super amazing like some people thought. I didnt like the dry humor, the iditic plotline of saving one girl who could just be dead, the ending was a little unsatifying, and the no-back story kinda hurt it, but added to the monster i suppose. Overall, I gave it a 4/5. I cant wait to watch it on DVD for the extra stuff.

And if anyone says its garbage, 3 weeks at the top of the box office is not garbage, especially with some good competition.

sSubZerOo

Was it suppose to have backstory though? The movie was suppose to be a testimony for survivors in New York during the attack.. And I don't understand how saving the girl was idiotic? The main character loved her, wouldn't you do that if some one you truly loved was hurt?

its not that it didnt have enough backstory, it didnt have any! I understand it wasnt the movie's direction to tell us how this happened, but more info couldve been revealed...

to answer your question, he didnt know if she was alive or not. He put himself and three others at risk by going after one. That is highlighted on how dum they were when SPOILER.

.

.

.

.

They all died in the end instead of the originals leaving then and letting the girl die. They KNEW they were going to cut it close. And she may be dead anyway. I would not take the chance with others to watch for, if i was bymyself, hells yeah. But I have a responsibility to get 3 others to safety, I would do that.

So what.. You seem to think its ok to let a loved one go when there is a chance they still may be alive? And the 3 came under their own power, they decided to go.. In the end I most likely would do in the exact same situation.

And no he didn't have the responsibility to get 3 others to safety they were grown adults.., They had teh choice of going but they decided to stick with him..

And it wasn't suppose to have back story. It was depicting a single event that surviors went through.. Its more for the sake of realism, that this is truly a real document record..

well, the people followed him into danger and risk of time, and if he was smart, he wouldntve risked them as well as himself. They decide to folllow him, he lets them, therefore he has a responsibility to be quick so the others can get to safety.

I know, but document is a little far-fetched and not necessarily real.... but 10 bucks said the government knew how it happened, but it was never said.

The government knew nothing.. To further illustrate this, look at the last scene where its panning out on the ocean, you will see a small meteor hit the ocean in the left.. Its very hard to spot but its there, and I think I honestly was the only person who spotted it in the theaters..

Sorry that sitll doesn't make sense.. He did not hold responibility to these people.. He was not their leader, they chose to save the girl as well and help him.. I am sorry but most people under this amount of stress where possibly the most important person in their lives is in danger, will do anything to save them.

i missed that part :cry:

I see what you mean, but peole under stress make dumb mistakes... its human nature

I thought it reinvented the monster genre which really has been an embarrassment in the past 20 years.... If you have a killer sound system, and tv, then yes.. The movie has some of the best sound I have heard in a very very long time.sSubZerOo

What kinda competition did this movie have? Godzilla hehe. And oh yeah, your sig is incorrect. You can punch your own back, so your hands can in fact hit what your eyes cant see. :)