Cloverfield

[bobby]

Originally Posted by gabrillowise

Yes, but it would be unusual for a home video to be more or less an hour and a half of frantic running about, and for us to watch our home videos in a dark room on a 30ft screen.

Depends on your home/ what you get up to I guess.

[azzemojo]

Originally Posted by bobby

Depends on your home/ what you get up to I guess.

We've not all got a 30ft screens in our house. It's all that fame and cash from Swordmaster thats gone to your head

[bobby]

My TV's not quite 30ft, but it is sufficiently big so as to make the videos off my 4 year old Sony Ericsson camera phone pretty big and grainy. All things being relative, it's probably about the same diff as cloverfield at cineworld, except you're watching me chase boys about and record chops and that.

[azzemojo]

I'd pay big monies to watch your home videos bobby

[Mike - Indi Rev]

I thought Cloverfield was fantastic. Was totally engrossed in it and was just so impressed with how it all came together using only the one camera POV for the whole film. I was glad they didn't decide to add some scientist guy explaining every little detail of how and why the events happened. If recently suffering through AVP: Requiem has taught me anything, it's that less is more! The uncertainty and the seemingly inexplicablity of the whole thing just makes it all the scarier.

I've no idea where the whole motion sickness is coming from but as I don't ever normally suffer from any form of motion sickness it may not have applied to me anyway.

Don't listen to the naysayers, go see it!

[Severed666]

Originally Posted by ~smack

I really don't get all this motion sickness shit, I never even noticed the camera as being shaky - although I guess keeping the shot squared isn't on the agenda when you're running away from a fucking huge monster. I really liked the film, it's basically just Godzilla but I enjoyed it anyway. And I loved 'Hud' (The camera guy) I though he was damn funny.

I totally agree i thought Hud was funny as fuck, His one liners where dead good and i was pissing myself when he was talking about flaming homeless people in the underground haha. I stopped noticing the shaky camera when the monster started doing stuff cos there was so much going on. thought it was an ace film. Even tho its about a big monster i thought it was pretty realistic rather than all the macho bullshit that comes with alot of these films

[*Lyndsey*]

I really enjoyed it

Liked the POV, the plot, Hud, the monster and its bitey thingies. Did feel a little sick afterwards, but was probably all the Ben and Jerrys. Im also glad they didnt go into detail about where it came from etc as it would have ruined the film. Fucking resiliant camera by the way!

[kj]

At the start I was thinking 'I don't think I can put up with the moving camera for the whole duration' but actually after the first 10 minutes you don't even notice it. It was only till I got home and read this thread where someone else was mentioning the moving camera and though 'Shit, I didn't even remember that'. The film is great. So many unanswered questions though but I guess we've all come to expect that from Abrams.

[Fritz]

I thought this was ace and strongly urge anyone who is interested to check it out in the cinema!

[Anzio]

Originally Posted by Fritz

I thought this was ace and strongly urge anyone who is interested to check it out in the cinema!

aye good call........ its defo a big screen movie and not a dodgy-half-arsed-pirate-copy-movie

[RussellOrGoose]

i enjoyed it.
i agree that Hud was rather annoying.
when the rats are running you know something bads happening

however parts of it did remind me of the 9/11 dvd filmed by the 2 french brothers who were in and around the trade centre when it all happened.

[Thee Alex]

I finally saw this on a DVD ripped download.

I think it's one of the best films I've seen in years and, contrary to what people are saying about watching it on a big screen, I think it's probably more suited to a small screen. On my MacBook it seemed just about right, and I didn't get any motion sickness, on my girlfriend's large widescreen TV it was a bit harder to watch (and made her really sick). I think it worked brilliantly on a small screen as that's what you'd watch something like that on.

I didn't find the film scary at all, but I do think it successfully portrayed the level of panic that you'd feel in that situation - I was utterly gripped for the duration.

Hud was ok I thought, he was just a normal, slightly thick, guy in a horrible, horrible situation, trying to help his friends. So what if he sometimes said stupid things, are you telling me that everything that would come out of your mouth in a situation like that would be pure gold? I know I'd be gibbering rubbish.

The best thing though were the effects, and the way that huge set pieces were reduced to fragments glimpsed through the viewfinder of the camera - other films would have spent a good 3 or 4 minutes on the Empire State Building collapsing, but Cloverfield showed us just enough for us to think 'Holy fuck, is that the Empire State?' before people were running from the smoke and debris. Likewise the Statue of Liberty head - no lingering shots of it, just a crowd of people (realistically) taking photos with their phones.

Referring visually to the footage of September 11th was genius, and 100% intentional I think, and it reminded me of how I'd felt watching the footage on the TV 7 years ago, which just added to the reality of the whole thing and further suspended my disbelief.

Finally, not explaining anything was GENIUS IMO. In the real world we have to try and piece together what was going on from small fragments, so the film further sucked us in.

[njw]

Aye - my simplified review.

a) good film.
b) didnie make me feel sick.
c) was gid.