Title: Cloverfield
delita - January 12, 2008 07:10 PM (GMT)
rofljohn - January 12, 2008 07:34 PM (GMT)
Dajhail - January 12, 2008 07:43 PM (GMT)
But... Harry Knowles said it was awesome!
Swords_McSwords - January 12, 2008 11:57 PM (GMT)
Isn't Harry Knowles some fat retard?
Dajhail - January 13, 2008 12:01 AM (GMT)
He's the legendary webmaster of
http://www.aintitcool.com and yeah I think he's a couple of stages past fat now. He can't even walk at the moment, he goes to see movies in a wheelchair.
But he's rich, happy and successful so it seems to working for him.
Swords_McSwords - January 13, 2008 12:03 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Dajhail @ Jan 12 2008, 07:01 PM) |
He's the legendary webmaster of http://www.aintitcool.com and yeah I think he's a couple of stages past fat now. He can't even walk at the moment, he goes to see movies in a wheelchair.
But he's rich, happy and successful so it seems to working for him. |
Heh, makes me wonder when he's gonna die.
delita - January 13, 2008 01:54 AM (GMT)
you wont even see the monster
Dajhail - January 13, 2008 02:05 AM (GMT)
According to Harry Knowles:
| QUOTE |
| What is the monster? How do you describe something that doesn’t look like anything you’ve ever seen before? It’s not a fucking upright walking whale. It doesn’t look like any iteration of GODZILLA that we’ve ever seen. It is enormous. And even though I’ve seen it… I am hard-pressed to come up with a comparative creation. You know that big fucking thing in THE MIST? It isn’t that. Is the creature a biped? I’m not sure, I think it might’ve been a four-legged beastie… it has a tail, it has teeth and freaky eyes like that horse that died in ANIMAL HOUSE. It’s kinda of a grayish-yellowish-off-white looking thing. But more important than the creature is what this fucker does. He basically goes bug-nuts. |
So I guess you do see it, but you might not know what the fuck you're looking at. Maybe because of the super shakycam.
delita - January 13, 2008 03:35 AM (GMT)
yeah that sounds awful
and its by that lost alias fag!! :P
KK4 - January 13, 2008 04:08 AM (GMT)
Sounds like Cthulhu has something to do with this. The whole "blair witch" thing where the movie takes place through the eyes of a video camera seems to be the new "it" thing. George Romero is coming out with "Diary of the Dead" which is Cloverfield/blare witch with zombies.
I've seen the previews for the movie and quite frankly I think it is going to be balls.
Dajhail - January 13, 2008 06:27 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (delita @ Jan 13 2008, 03:35 AM) |
yeah that sounds awful
and its by that lost alias fag!! :P |
Actually he's busy making Star Trek, he only produced this.
Cloverfield's directed by a guy who directed a couple of episodes of Homicide and Felicity, and written by one of the guys who wrote for Buffy and Angel.
Which doesn't sound like a bad creative team to me.
JIHAUS - January 13, 2008 12:34 PM (GMT)
Dunno, I'm kinda mixed about it. I'm not exactly dying to watch it, so I guess I'll wait and see how the reviews turn out.
HArry the motorsport enthusiast - January 13, 2008 09:22 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (KK4 @ Jan 13 2008, 04:08 AM) |
| Sounds like Cthulhu has something to do with this. |
no not really
voted live up to hype (i want to believe)
meep - January 13, 2008 11:57 PM (GMT)
Dajhail - January 17, 2008 03:25 AM (GMT)
THE REVIEWS ARE IN.
A couple of them anyway. Critics seem to be split 50/50 on it, with the ones I care about saying it's a pretty good monster movie but nothing special. Characters and acting are at best ok, you never get a clear look at the creature, and what you do see isn't that great. But after a long dull intro, the pace is apparently relentless and it hasn't been dragged out into an overlong 4 hour epic.
So it seems if you like watching monster movies about New York yuppies getting killed off one by one filmed entirely with a shakey handheld camera, and you aren't bothered that it's not a groundbreaking work of cinematic genius, then it's probably worth seeing.
But I'll wait for the DVD.