The aspect I find interesting about Cloverfield is that the marketing bridges the gap between reality (our world) and fiction (their world) a little bit. The characters have MySpace pages, their fake drink has a real looking website as does the drilling company, and so on. If they could string this along until the next movie came out, that would be amazing. It's like a world around you instead of in-front of you on a screen. Anyway, he might be doing the same thing with Star Trek. http://www.paramount.com/startrek/ click on the red dot.
Hmmm... and shouldn't the same hold true for those slobbing Abrams' knob over this? I don't think the thread was entitled "Cloverfield Fawning Appreciation Thread." This thing was the most hyped movie of the last six months - I suppose because of that I should heap Harry Knowles-like praise on it and not look at it critically? "Meet the Spartans" is the number one movie in the country right now - I suppose we shouldn't criticize that one either. After all, it's just a parody. I've seen Cloverfield twice now. I thought it was an interesting take on the genre. That said, it had many deep flaws which I can't forgive. The more I dig into the viral marketing, the less it makes sense. Especially now with the tie-ins to the "Lost" world and to Japanese companies milking nectar of off a giant monster. Explain to me how you think that's a good idea. The movie had a serious tone, yet all of a sudden it comes down to this as to why the monster atacked? What's next? A rabid, giant Hello Kitty attacks Tokyo after having it's teats milked for a new flavor of Tang? Abrams seems to me to a be a good "idea" guy, but something gets lost in the execution. Witness the meandering of Lost since its inception. I hope the same doesn't hold true for Star Trek - his casting choices and the general idea seem great, but Trekkies are already crapping themselves b/c a.) the plot involves time travel again, and b.) it looks like they build Enterprise on Eart instead on in space.
Shouldn't the same be said of you? Again, I didn't see where it was mandated that this be the "Cloverfield Fanboy Thread." Do we bug you when you post your neverending sob stories in any thread that has anything to do with a relationship? It's a BBS - get over yourself. You don't like the post, you don't have to respond to it.
Right. Because this is exactly what I and the others were arguing about in that thread. Reading comprehension is not one of your skill sets, is it?
You've made your criticisms, man. that's fine - there's nothing wrong with that. And there's nothing wrong with discussing it (for example, I don't really buy the 'dumb backstory' criticism because, well, we are talking about a Giant Monster Movie. That's kind of a prerequisite. ) But you are totally overblowing this. The thread is still going because - you know - people are still just now seeing the movie. And other people are just discussing different aspects of it. 'slobbing Abrams' knob'? 'Fawning Appreciation'? Seriously, man, what in the world? Very few in this entire thread even come close to this. I don't understand why you are getting so worked up and angry. So some people like the movie - it's not that big a deal.
I don't think anyone is saying that Tagruto is milking the monster to get the nectar. The apparent story is that the drilling for this nectar has disturbed the monster and caused it to leave the depths of the sea.
Not angry at all. Just sad that this is thought of as a good movie by so many. If there is a sequel - I guess it would have to be in a different style and deal with a different issue. Either origins or aftermath. I hope they wouldn't go the Godzilla route, as the backstory hints at, of a monster trashing human cities b/c humans have trashed nature b/c well Godzilla has done that about 56 times. I think an aftermath movie where Voltron end sup being the only thing that can defeat Cloverfield might be good. Except not the lion Voltron but instead the car Voltron. But made of the cars from The Fast & Furious. Led by Vin Diesel. Yeah.
For those of you who care.....here is the hasbro toy that gives you a good idea what the thing looks like http://www.hasbrotoyshop.com/Products_DetailView.htm?ID=21030&TP=HR
I really liked it, and the problem I had with it is different than the problems other people seem to have had with it. What the hell was Hud thinking when deciding what to film? Let me give a representative example. There was one scene where the military was fighting the monster down the street and Hud got separated from the others. Hud was on one side of the street, the others were across the street, and the monster was to the left from Hud's perspective facing the others. Why the hell is he taping his friends cowering behind a car?
But he wasn't cowering in fear, he was exposed and pointing the camera directly at his friends (who were all looking at the battle, IIRC).
Two alternate endings just hit the internets: <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7qCfPkhnHmU&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7qCfPkhnHmU&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JrF1QIXwg64&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JrF1QIXwg64&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
That's how I remember it too- but this is how it's posted on AICN.com. These two endings are supposed to be on the DVD. Not earth shattering or satisfying like the alternate I Am Legend ending.
