Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Cloverfield what did you think (spoiler alert)

Regis_Neo said:
Eh sorry, I just get tired of seeing poor grammer all the time. Peace?
Click to expand...

i hear ya i hate the whole ROTFLMAO thing, heck i have a hard time reading NRG everytime i see that im thinking "what does that stand for?" lol

no sweat brother, i just want everyone to know i try my best believe me 23 yrs old an cant spell doesnt really feel too good

have a good one

danny
 
Cloverfield was alright. The thing that bothers me the most about it was when the Camera dude fell/got in a helicopter crash/got beat up by thing/the explosions why didn't the camera ever break??? And why did he record everything???
 
Too much camera shaking was not making the movie seem authentic...if i was holding the camera, I would manage to avoid the moving around (except for the monster parts of course)...how hard is it to focus on a camera, most of them these days are simple to use the zoom features.
One thing JJ could have done better to make this a great movie was possible make more time for the storyline, if not for the characters, than for the monster itself. The general audience had no idea who these people were, or how this monster is in affecting them (those big fans of JJ know that there was more to it than the movie itself); audiences don't like to be left out in the blue about whats going on when they are watching the movie and by having these bits of info left out, it made the characters seem so random (some of them are more involved in the main story than it appears to be, of course).
I consider this movie a B if not a B-, it was good, but of course it just couldn't really live up to the hype it was building earlier last year. I will be looking forward to seeing more of how this will turn out, it has the potiental to recover and finish strong if JJ decides to move along with a sequel.

CMT ​
 
I hear "TJ Miller" is in the film. Can anyone confirm/deny whether this is TJ Miller from Still Remains or a different dude altogether?
 
Dom said:
I hear "TJ Miller" is in the film. Can anyone confirm/deny whether this is TJ Miller from Still Remains or a different dude altogether?
Click to expand...

yes he is, he is pretty much the camera man, i spent most of the time laughing at his jokes, he was great comic-relief!

danny
 
i just saw it and i thought it was reeeeeallly cool. all the military stuff and the monster was all awesome!
but the ending did disapoint me a bit. but the movie itself was really cool.
two of my friends hot motion sickness while watching it cause of the camera shaking! haha! one puked in his mouth! hahahahah!

and everyone on here with their ideas of worst movies are wrong(earagon and high school musical are REALLY bad though. blahhhh), the worst movie EVER is open water.
that movie was the deffinition of lame. the ending was a good 7132789783421123790129049013290841274781278934789123897239879879871234897423 times worse than any ending, ever.
i hate that movie with all my being, and if you havnt seen it yet, i only recomend it so that you can see what a terrible movie really is.
 
I think JJ wanted us to be shocked at the ending.
I was indeed shocked at the ending.
He wanted us to leave there not knowing what just happened.
I left there not knowing what just happened.

It's one of those "acquired-taste" movies.
 
yea a big ol' monster with like4 arms huge scary face and a big tail!
and it made little ones and if they bite you, youd explode.
or thats what i gathered by seeing the girl fgo behind the tarp and blood whent everywhere after, like she had exploded. and there was also a military person that looked like he had exploded too during the same sceen.
 
master of puppets said:
yea a big ol' monster with like4 arms huge scary face and a big tail!
and it made little ones and if they bite you, youd explode.
or thats what i gathered by seeing the girl fgo behind the tarp and blood whent everywhere after, like she had exploded. and there was also a military person that looked like he had exploded too during the same sceen.
Click to expand...

yes i caught on to the military man with no stomach too

the only thing i didnt like was the monster was still alive after you clearly see the b2 bomber drop a bunch of daisy cutters on it...

i loved the movie, huge jj fan

i just hope LOST doesnt end like the movie did...

danny
 
Cloverfield relies almost entirely on a restricting narrative device, i.e. the audience never learns more than the protagonists learn, but it takes this to an unhealthy extreme. I shouldn't have to go look up background information for the backstory to even make some degree of sense. As the movie presented it, a random monster with absolutely no origin stomps up New York and withstands the military counterattack with typical movie-monster "immune to bullets" fare. It kills everyone and survives the big bombing at the end. That's it. That's all anyone needs to know about the movie, summed up in two sentences. No plot point was anything more than a generic, painted-on attempt at depth, as none of the characters' backstories had any relevance whatsoever to the movie. Ultimately, that's what Cloverfield is: a bunch of irrelevant scenes followed by a monster mash.

I think that we as a culture are in pretty bad shape if "random destruction" passes for quality entertainment. Cloverfield lacks something I thought was a requisite for "good" movies in general—something resembling a coherent plot. It didn't have to be a literary great, because as superhero movies prove, even a half-assed stab at a plot is often enough. Yet Cloverfield thought it was above all that, and it wound up as utter drivel and a total waste of my $11 to see it. I wouldn't even recommend pirating it.
 
I only paid $5 to see it (AMC morning special, lol). I guess each person to their own opinions, cause to me, the whole idea of the movie was that it didn't need to be plot driven necessarily, nor relied on the audience needing background info for the backstory; rather it did make good use of the restricting narrative device and tried to show a "real" life sort of scenario. I mean, if you were there in the middle of the city when the monster starts attacking, you obviously aren't going to know anything either like the protagonists in the film and thus would be just as lost as anyone else as to the situation. You wouldn't be concerned with character backstory, etc as much since it de-emphasizes the current situation, the here and now of the immediate threat of the monster(s). The movie isn't intended to be shown like your typical monster movie, where you know what's going to happen, the backstory, etc. It tries to accomplish more of a realistic experience, as if you were there, which is different than most movies out there.

A note on the monster though, I do agree it was a bit more indestructable than it should have been, I mean they've only been bombing it and hitting it with artilary, gunfire, and who knows what else for the last several hours, and it's still presumably standing at the end. That and it seemed to change in size throughout the movie, going from being able to decapitate the Statue of Liberty to not even taller than a skyscrapper.

Could the movie have been better? Yes, but just about any movie could be better. Was it worth seeing? Yes, especially if you avoid nighttime prices, lol.
 
marril, im gonna tell you that i take some offense to your statement about our culture being in bad shape if "random destruction" pass for quality entertainment.
i for one LOVE random destruction, i think that explosions and the like are some of the coolest things ever. and i feel as though youre saying if someone does find that sort of stuff quality entertainment then they are simple minded or foolish.
now i dont know about everyone here on pokegym, but every guy ive ever met thinks that explosions or cool stuff like that are AWESOME, much like myself.
 
I mean, if you were there in the middle of the city when the monster starts attacking, you obviously aren't going to know anything either like the protagonists in the film and thus would be just as lost as anyone else as to the situation.
Click to expand...

You would be, but that doesn't mean a movie set from this perspective, which for all intents and purposes wound up being about half an hour of pointless drivel and another 45 minutes of pointless monster carnage, would be any good. In fact, I'd rate the crappy American version of Godzilla as better than Cloverfield. Cloverfield was a neat idea, but in practice it's a failed experiment enjoyed mainly by those who think the best parts of a movie are the explosions.

marril, im gonna tell you that i take some offense to your statement about our culture being in bad shape if "random destruction" pass for quality entertainment.
Click to expand...

That and a dime'll get you a cup of coffee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top