EVIL PUPPET MASTERS

7 Responses to “CLOVERFIELD: Viewer Reactions”

1. Matt Says:
   January 18th, 2008 at 11:52 pm

   Liked the movie with one exception, the ending. Would not have walked out of the theater scratching my head with some simple closure. Possibly some stock type news footage of the blast and alive or dead. Scientists arguing over the creatures origins. This running during the end credits. With something would have left thinking cool film. As it stands I left feeling cheated.

2. Zach Says:
   January 19th, 2008 at 1:17 am

   Am I the only one who was really disappointed by this movie? I mean they showed the monster a fair amount but it was kinda like a side character. I know that sounds wierd but no one seemed exceptionally concerned about what it was or why it was there. I mean some of the characters wouldn’t even look at the thing when they had the chance. And it was most deffinately really lacking in imformation. The monster was never given a name, where it came from, or why it was in New York. They could have easily added these facts to one of the numerous news reports shown in the film. In addition to all these things, the way in which the movie was filmed was indeed interesting, but the majority of the theater, including myself, were extremely nautious throughout the film.

3. Ward Says:
   January 19th, 2008 at 7:12 am

   Why does there have to be all that information? Does the fact that no one knows what it is, where it came from, what’s going on add to the confusion of what really goes on during a catastrophe? Remember during 9/11 all the erroneous news accounts? It was mayhem. That’s what the filmmakers were trying to do here — trying to capture a real life disaster as it’s happening. I thought it was thrilling.

4. Zach Says:
   January 19th, 2008 at 3:05 pm

   And during 9/11 those news reports focused on the towers, just liek the movie should have focused on the monster, not the just the four people. Also, after 9/11 we found out information about why, how, and who. Imagine how you would feel if you never found out that information. Because thats how I felt walking out of the theater.

5. alucardbarnivous Says:
   January 19th, 2008 at 10:42 pm

   Right up your alley:

   http://www.leiasmetalbikini.com/CFT.html

6. q... Says:
   January 19th, 2008 at 11:00 pm

   STAR TREK TEASER!!!! SQUEE!!!
   Sorry this is about Cloverfield
   I liked it as a monster movie. And believe me, I have seen a mess of them. It was original in it’s POV and scary/unsettling. I too wanted to know a bit more info as well, but we have to remember it was told from the video camera’s POV, not ours or anyone elses. We saw some of what the characters saw, but not all of it- which was frustrating at times (but in a good way). But it didn’t make it any less of an experience as a film for me- I always want to know more. I was surprised how short the running time was…but by the end of the film, I had enough of the shaky cam. It served the movie well and felt like a documentary at times.
   Creepy monster (cryptozoologists/xenobiologists will have a field day looking at it) and the thingies dropping off it!! EWW!! Similar in feeling to Starship Troopers bugs…disgusting and brutal. The effects were stunning. I always wonder why NYC….I walked out of the theater thinking, what about Oklahoma City or Akron or even Chicago??? ah…wait….monster movie….
   just my two cents….actually $9.25 but who is counting…;)

7. Zach Says:
   January 20th, 2008 at 12:41 am

   I agree that the POV was a creative idea, but they severely over did it. The fact that so many people were nautious was not really a food thing. But I actually found out that in the last scene of the movie (on the ferris wheel at Coney Island) you could see a pod fall out of the sky into the ocean. This at least answers the question of where it came from. But I still think the movie could have been a lot better.

Leave a Reply