Cloverfield thoughts(*SPOILERS!!!*!**)

What did you think of the ending I enjoyed I thought it was a great ending but most people hated it.I just want to know what you thought of it.I just like that you really don't know if they died or not.And it starts out with people talking on the camera and saying there name and ends the same way.

ok too many people dont understand good movies

alot of people didnt like it bcause it wasnt the generic kind of movie every1 is used to

and thats wat i loved about it..and it kicked ass

yeah, i liked it a lot

i never found out if anyone saw this at the end

[spoiler] at the end, when the guys aiming the cam at the ocean, did you notice the big splash in the top right corner of the screen? i was like "cool!!" when i saw it, so maybe it came from space [/spoiler]

thats the way i like to look at it anyway

yeah, i liked it a lot

i never found out if anyone saw this at the end

thats the way i like to look at it anyway

maccer101

I think I read in the IMDB forums somewhere, that that splash is supposed to be a satellite falling from space. A japanese satellite. It's in the commentary I believe.

ok too many people dont understand good movies

alot of people didnt like it bcause it wasnt the generic kind of movie every1 is used to

and thats wat i loved about it..and it kicked ass

senses_blank

[QUOTE="senses_blank"]

ok too many people dont understand good movies

alot of people didnt like it bcause it wasnt the generic kind of movie every1 is used to

and thats wat i loved about it..and it kicked ass

gamergeek545

I didn't understand why people burst like that. But I suppose that's part of the horror of Cloverfield. You only know as much as the characters do. It's panic, chaos, you have no idea what's going on at all. Very well done.

ok too many people dont understand good movies

alot of people didnt like it bcause it wasnt the generic kind of movie every1 is used to

and thats wat i loved about it..and it kicked ass

senses_blank

I think that's very true. People complain movies are too cliche, but when something radical like Cloverfield comes along they can never appreciate it. It subverts the genre by putting you in the shoes of the civilians, which was a great way to do it in my opinion. Much better than the typical military actions scenes and government action which has been done to death *coughTransformerscough*

It was... Eh... Mediocre.

The camera angle was unique and all... But, it sucked, you couldn't tell what was happening half of the time.

And I didn't like the plot... OH GOD! A F---ING MONSTER! AHH! LET'S RUN AROUND THE CITY AND TRY TO FIND SOME GIRL THAT REALISTICALLY WOULDN'T BE ALIVE! AHH!...

It had good dialouge and was good when the camera wasn't flying everywhere.

I'd give it a 7.2/10.

i thought it was w/e. i found the movie better then i expected though. the monster was really terrifying. if there's a cloverfield 2, it probably wouldn't be the same monster though.GUNpoint_

Because?

I thought it was great, loved the realism in it (by that i mean the panic and confusion and also that know one knows what is going on and no one ever truly finds out, just like it would be if that really did happen).sxdx89

That's what I said! It really introduces a fresh feeling in movies by doing that. You only know as much as the characters do. So much left to be answered though, that part bothers me. It's fun NOT being spoon fed the story, but there's a lot of questions indeed.

[QUOTE="GUNpoint_"]i thought it was w/e. i found the movie better then i expected though. the monster was really terrifying. if there's a cloverfield 2, it probably wouldn't be the same monster though.Apollo5000

Because?

I think it'd be a toss-up. You don't know for sure if the MOAB ultimately destroyed the creature. Since they unleashed everything they had on it and it didn't so much as bleed. The final attempt could have killed it, or just mad it even more raged. I read somewhere that the creature in the movie was just a juvenile. It was confused and alone is why it attacked.

i loved it. cloverfield 2 can be anything really. they said in the movie they were gunna nuke the place, so maybe its the continuation of the invasion/infection . who knows. ill see itBIGBUZZ55

Imagine for a moment that something like that did happen. So suddenly. The drastic measures the military would have to deploy contain it. Having no time to study it or come up with a way to destroy it or run it off. Within 24 hours giving the order to *NUKE* a major city on your own soil. That is really scary...

I thought it was a great movie, loved every minute, it had me anxiously waiting to see what happened next and i was like zomg when i saw what happened to the girl who got bitten. The ending was good tho a bit cliffhanger-ish but overall i was happy with it.

[QUOTE="BIGBUZZ55"]i loved it. cloverfield 2 can be anything really. they said in the movie they were gunna nuke the place, so maybe its the continuation of the invasion/infection . who knows. ill see it_Scooter_

Imagine for a moment that something like that did happen. So suddenly. The drastic measures the military would have to deploy contain it. Having no time to study it or come up with a way to destroy it or run it off. Within 24 hours giving the order to *NUKE* a major city on your own soil. That is really scary...

It was... Eh... Mediocre.

The camera angle was unique and all... But, it sucked, you couldn't tell what was happening half of the time.

And I didn't like the plot... OH GOD! A F---ING MONSTER! AHH! LET'S RUN AROUND THE CITY AND TRY TO FIND SOME GIRL THAT REALISTICALLY WOULDN'T BE ALIVE! AHH!...

It had good dialouge and was good when the camera wasn't flying everywhere.

I'd give it a 7.2/10.

qubert27

It was... Eh... Mediocre.

The camera angle was unique and all... But, it sucked, you couldn't tell what was happening half of the time.

And I didn't like the plot... OH GOD! A F---ING MONSTER! AHH! LET'S RUN AROUND THE CITY AND TRY TO FIND SOME GIRL THAT REALISTICALLY WOULDN'T BE ALIVE! AHH!...

It had good dialouge and was good when the camera wasn't flying everywhere.

I'd give it a 7.2/10.

qubert27

The camera wasn't that big of a deal. It was still when there was something crucial to see. And if you put yourself in that situation (the army everywhere, shooting, shelling, yelling... NO ONE knows what's going on) do you think you'd actually stop and get a real still shot on everything around you? I'd go after my loved ones too in a situation like that. It's pretty much the end of the world as far as you know it. Wouldn't you want to be with those you cared about?

I loved the movie.....Hud was the best I mean who could come up with Flaming Hobos!Wolf-avatar

If you search it, there's actual accounts of kids setting homeless people on fire as a joke :( several resulting in deaths from extreme burns.

[QUOTE="Wolf-avatar"]I loved the movie.....Hud was the best I mean who could come up with Flaming Hobos!_Scooter_

If you search it, there's actual accounts of kids setting homeless people on fire as a joke :( several resulting in deaths from extreme burns.

[QUOTE="GUNpoint_"]i thought it was w/e. i found the movie better then i expected though. the monster was really terrifying. if there's a cloverfield 2, it probably wouldn't be the same monster though.Apollo5000

Because?

ok too many people dont understand good movies

alot of people didnt like it bcause it wasnt the generic kind of movie every1 is used to

and thats wat i loved about it..and it kicked ass

senses_blank

dont over generalize. Alot of people dont like the movie because the acting sucked, the character holding the camera was very obnoxious (which is bad since we are with him throughout the entire movie. Infact apart from the camera angle, this movie was pretty generic. Tell me what you thought was so "ungeneric" about this "Big Monster Destroying" wait for it....."New York City!" I mean like Big monster in City isnt bad enough, they had to make it the most generic destructable city in TV history, NYC! The movie was like first person Godzilla :|

[QUOTE="senses_blank"]

ok too many people dont understand good movies

alot of people didnt like it bcause it wasnt the generic kind of movie every1 is used to

and thats wat i loved about it..and it kicked ass

II_Seraphim_II

dont over generalize. Alot of people dont like the movie because the acting sucked, the character holding the camera was very obnoxious (which is bad since we are with him throughout the entire movie. Infact apart from the camera angle, this movie was pretty generic. Tell me what you thought was so "ungeneric" about this "Big Monster Destroying" wait for it....."New York City!" I mean like Big monster in City isnt bad enough, they had to make it the most generic destructable city in TV history, NYC! The movie was like first person Godzilla :|

That's exactly the point of creating the movie. An American godzilla. And it's ungeneric in that you're given so little information about what's going on. Everything is happening so fast and everyone is in a panic, you feel confused as to where to go, what to do, or what your next move is. A lot is left to the imagination. I guess I just like to come out of the theatre wondering, thinking, and asking questions.

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="senses_blank"]

ok too many people dont understand good movies

alot of people didnt like it bcause it wasnt the generic kind of movie every1 is used to

and thats wat i loved about it..and it kicked ass

_Scooter_

dont over generalize. Alot of people dont like the movie because the acting sucked, the character holding the camera was very obnoxious (which is bad since we are with him throughout the entire movie. Infact apart from the camera angle, this movie was pretty generic. Tell me what you thought was so "ungeneric" about this "Big Monster Destroying" wait for it....."New York City!" I mean like Big monster in City isnt bad enough, they had to make it the most generic destructable city in TV history, NYC! The movie was like first person Godzilla :|

That's exactly the point of creating the movie. An American godzilla. And it's ungeneric in that you're given so little information about what's going on. Everything is happening so fast and everyone is in a panic, you feel confused as to where to go, what to do, or what your next move is. A lot is left to the imagination. I guess I just like to come out of the theatre wondering, thinking, and asking questions.

That's exactly the point of creating the movie. An American godzilla. And it's ungeneric in that you're given so little information about what's going on. Everything is happening so fast and everyone is in a panic, you feel confused as to where to go, what to do, or what your next move is. A lot is left to the imagination. I guess I just like to come out of the theatre wondering, thinking, and asking questions.

_Scooter_

I do too, i just wish it was sumthing better to ponder about. A movie i really liked that you can call "ungeneric" was the myst. On the surface it seems like your typical horror movie, but in actuallity, the main concept of the movie is human interaction rather than the terrifying myst. Thats sumthing different, not a horror movie where people are panicking and trying to get to saftey...thats wat every horror movie is like. I will admit that the FPview did add alot to the atmosphere, but the movie itself wasnt all that special. As for the rushed and hurried aspect of the movie, thats just like War of the Worlds where the main characters are constantly running and dont have time to think. While that does make the movie more "intense" it basically nulifies the chance of any character development what so ever. The characters end up having 2 modes, "fear" and "sad."The least they coulda done was be a little creative with the monster...I mean come on now...in every single horror movie the big monster always has little monsters that come along with it, like it was a planned invasion or sumthing...which then leaves you wondering "if this was a planned invasion...why send just one big monster instead of 100 and taking the entire nation in a day?"

IMO i personally think that trying to make the "wester" godzilla made the movie feel more generic than anything. Atleast Godzilla had a subtle anti-nuke theme to it that made the movie have sum semblance of substance. Dont get me wrong... Clovefield isnt "Terrible" or "bad"...its just not "great." Sure i'll watch it on the weekend if i've got nuthing to do, but its not a movie i would personally pickout.

[QUOTE="Apollo5000"]

[QUOTE="GUNpoint_"]i thought it was w/e. i found the movie better then i expected though. the monster was really terrifying. if there's a cloverfield 2, it probably wouldn't be the same monster though.GUNpoint_

Because?

You think that tiny blast could kill it?

If it were so simple there wouldn't be a problem in the first place...

I hated it.

I hated it not because of the camera angle and the anoying open ended climax. Those were anoying yes, I think I nearly broke the guy next to me's jaw when it ended, but still, they were not what made the movie poor.

It was the sheer, utter incrediblity of it all.

No person is stupid enough to go and try rescue that woman up in the tower. There may be some, just a few, but I like to think those are the people who would die by trying to break a brick wall with their face, or by checking a jammed gun by peering down the barrel; something totally idiotic and moronic that would win you the darwin award.

The alien just did not FEEL believable. The fact that it was impervious to what would INSTANTLY kill ANY living animal NO MATTER how large it possibly is just killed it for me. Let me tell you, a 1000 pound bomb landing on the back of any organic being would pulverize its innards instantly, and vapourise a good portion of its flesh.

People don't understand the power of modern weapons. Tank shells and armour piercing machine gun/assault rifle rounds KILL STUFF REALLY REALLY FAST. I don't like seeing stupid crap like a big lizard surviving explosions that would crack 10 meter thick titanium reinforced concrete, and shrugging off 50 cal rounds that would sink about 3 feet into an Elephant's core.

I don't want to go on. Its time humanity recognised in its movies that we kick ass and that in the future, its likely that WE will be the ones wiping out alien races.

I think there has been WAY too many Cloverfield threads in the past months...:cry:-Sluggo-

I was just thinking that haha. About a month ago, there were like 5 on one page of ot lol

HORRIBLE ending. If I wrote a story like that in 6th grade, I'd immediatley fail. My english teachers always told me to write endings that had a conclusion, not randomly stop.

Other than that, it wasn't bad. I am Legend was MUCH better.

I hated it.

I hated it not because of the camera angle and the anoying open ended climax. Those were anoying yes, I think I nearly broke the guy next to me's jaw when it ended, but still, they were not what made the movie poor.

It was the sheer, utter incrediblity of it all.

No person is stupid enough to go and try rescue that woman up in the tower. There may be some, just a few, but I like to think those are the people who would die by trying to break a brick wall with their face, or by checking a jammed gun by peering down the barrel; something totally idiotic and moronic that would win you the darwin award.

The alien just did not FEEL believable. The fact that it was impervious to what would INSTANTLY kill ANY living animal NO MATTER how large it possibly is just killed it for me. Let me tell you, a 1000 pound bomb landing on the back of any organic being would pulverize its innards instantly, and vapourise a good portion of its flesh.

People don't understand the power of modern weapons. Tank shells and armour piercing machine gun/assault rifle rounds KILL STUFF REALLY REALLY FAST. I don't like seeing stupid crap like a big lizard surviving explosions that would crack 10 meter thick titanium reinforced concrete, and shrugging off 50 cal rounds that would sink about 3 feet into an Elephant's core.

I don't want to go on. Its time humanity recognised in its movies that we kick ass and that in the future, its likely that WE will be the ones wiping out alien races.

RKfromDownunder

totally agree. Flashy special effects don't make a movie.

[QUOTE="RKfromDownunder"]

I hated it.

I hated it not because of the camera angle and the anoying open ended climax. Those were anoying yes, I think I nearly broke the guy next to me's jaw when it ended, but still, they were not what made the movie poor.

It was the sheer, utter incrediblity of it all.

No person is stupid enough to go and try rescue that woman up in the tower. There may be some, just a few, but I like to think those are the people who would die by trying to break a brick wall with their face, or by checking a jammed gun by peering down the barrel; something totally idiotic and moronic that would win you the darwin award.

The alien just did not FEEL believable. The fact that it was impervious to what would INSTANTLY kill ANY living animal NO MATTER how large it possibly is just killed it for me. Let me tell you, a 1000 pound bomb landing on the back of any organic being would pulverize its innards instantly, and vapourise a good portion of its flesh.

People don't understand the power of modern weapons. Tank shells and armour piercing machine gun/assault rifle rounds KILL STUFF REALLY REALLY FAST. I don't like seeing stupid crap like a big lizard surviving explosions that would crack 10 meter thick titanium reinforced concrete, and shrugging off 50 cal rounds that would sink about 3 feet into an Elephant's core.

I don't want to go on. Its time humanity recognised in its movies that we kick ass and that in the future, its likely that WE will be the ones wiping out alien races.

mohfrontline

totally agree. Flashy special effects don't make a movie.

Uhh... Yeah, right. You are using the "it's not realistic enough" excuse but obviously you are just bashing it because you didn't like the movie. Don't like it? Don't watch it and move on. If it's not realistic enough for you, then I suggest you don't watch any movies because no movie is realistic.

[QUOTE="senses_blank"]

ok too many people dont understand good movies

alot of people didnt like it bcause it wasnt the generic kind of movie every1 is used to

and thats wat i loved about it..and it kicked ass

Red-XIII

I think that's very true. People complain movies are too cliche, but when something radical like Cloverfield comes along they can never appreciate it. It subverts the genre by putting you in the shoes of the civilians, which was a great way to do it in my opinion. Much better than the typical military actions scenes and government action which has been done to death *coughTransformerscough*

no, i didnt like it cause they swing the camera around way too m,uch. i dont pay to see a movi where half of it is blur. NO, you don't need to use these crappy camera techniques to make a movie "suspenseful", plenty of movies have done that without pulling that crap. They needed to focus more on what was happening rather than "OMG THIS IZ A HANDHELD CAMERA!!1!!!" I seemed like too much of a gimmick. Aliens had the balls to show the damn thing coming out of the guy (and this was in the 80's) so why could they show the chick exploding in front of everyone?

It was... Eh... Mediocre.

The camera angle was unique and all... But, it sucked, you couldn't tell what was happening half of the time.

And I didn't like the plot... OH GOD! A F---ING MONSTER! AHH! LET'S RUN AROUND THE CITY AND TRY TO FIND SOME GIRL THAT REALISTICALLY WOULDN'T BE ALIVE! AHH!...

It had good dialouge and was good when the camera wasn't flying everywhere.

I'd give it a 7.2/10.

qubert27

you sir are too generous.

[QUOTE="Apollo5000"]

[QUOTE="GUNpoint_"]i thought it was w/e. i found the movie better then i expected though. the monster was really terrifying. if there's a cloverfield 2, it probably wouldn't be the same monster though._Scooter_

Because?

I think it'd be a toss-up. You don't know for sure if the MOAB ultimately destroyed the creature. Since they unleashed everything they had on it and it didn't so much as bleed. The final attempt could have killed it, or just mad it even more raged. I read somewhere that the creature in the movie was just a juvenile. It was confused and alone is why it attacked.

hahaha, it just wanted some friends to play halo with >___> I'd b pissed if i was that big and found out that they only make 60" tvs too.

[QUOTE="gamergeek545"][QUOTE="senses_blank"]

ok too many people dont understand good movies

alot of people didnt like it bcause it wasnt the generic kind of movie every1 is used to

and thats wat i loved about it..and it kicked ass

_Scooter_

I didn't understand why people burst like that. But I suppose that's part of the horror of Cloverfield. You only know as much as the characters do. It's panic, chaos, you have no idea what's going on at all. Very well done.

[spoiler] The small monsters are parasites. Just think about it. They attack the humans, but instead of ripping their limbs of they just slash at them and bite them. They leave big wounds but somehow the victims don't bleed. Then a few minutes later, the victim's stomach bursts violently open. Did you see how paranoid the military was when those kids told them that their friend was attacked and wounded by one of those monsters? A marine started pointing his gun at her stomach once he found out that she got wounded by one of those monsters. [/spoiler]

I was about to ask the obvious question of how anyone could hate this movie, but then I realized something: people when they go to movies don't like to see mankind lose to something unexplained. it wasn't a happy ending. it wasn't a "man and the United States military kicked that monster's @$$" victory, but more of a pending doom with an unknown fate of all characters involved.

plus, you throw anything else in there, there's a good chance the average person is not going to be able to pick it up. its sad, but true. they just probably didn't get the point. I thought it was fantastic. fantastic movie with a fantastic ending.

I was about to ask the obvious question of how anyone could hate this movie, but then I realized something: people when they go to movies don't like to see mankind lose to something unexplained. it wasn't a happy ending. it wasn't a "man and the United States military kicked that monster's @$$" victory, but more of a pending doom with an unknown fate of all characters involved.

plus, you throw anything else in there, there's a good chance the average person is not going to be able to pick it up. its sad, but true. they just probably didn't get the point. I thought it was fantastic. fantastic movie with a fantastic ending.

IntegraBella

I think you are absolutely correct.

I was about to ask the obvious question of how anyone could hate this movie, but then I realized something: people when they go to movies don't like to see mankind lose to something unexplained. it wasn't a happy ending. it wasn't a "man and the United States military kicked that monster's @$$" victory, but more of a pending doom with an unknown fate of all characters involved.

plus, you throw anything else in there, there's a good chance the average person is not going to be able to pick it up. its sad, but true. they just probably didn't get the point. I thought it was fantastic. fantastic movie with a fantastic ending.

IntegraBella

The monster made his first full appearance in Cloverfield, where he was seen rampaging through New York City and being attacked by the United States military[7], resulting in an airstrike that obliterates Manhattan and, according to an interview with Abrams, kills the monster.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloverfield_%28creature%29

[spoiler] The monster did not die at the end. "It's still alive", the words you hear at the end of the credits. These words are played in reverse, so during the movie they make no sense. Also, you can see the monter falling into the ocean during the last few scenes on the beach. And the movie rocks! [/spoiler] BlackAlpha666

Actually it's not shown in the movie but it dies. But in a interview they say it dies in the end.