Ackey Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Oh! My! GOD!!! How good!?!?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigfinLatic Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Oh! My! GOD!!! How good!?!?! Absolutely sensational - I think I was genuinely nearly sick with fear at about 5 different points.... just perfect suspense filmaking, heddeous, thrilling, powerful and incredibly addictive.... you just cant describe how this fim makes you feel like you are genuinely there too... Horrific and brilliant points... 1. Dont get seperated from your friends - ever... ie, wander off on your own on a suspesion bridge when a big monster is on the loose... 2. Never go down deserted subways - this is a definite no no - just brilliant use of the nightvision camera.... when you see rats running away, you know you are in trouble... 3. If you get bitten by anything, never think your are fine - exploding convulsions central... 4. Never shout "yeah got you you sucker" whilst in a helicopter - just above where said monter was - a brilliant sequence.... really terrifying and you really get sucked into being there.... which leads to... 5. The 'money shot' - brilliant - "what you looking at??" ... and... did you stay until after the credits....??? I didnt but they let us in when they were rolling from a previous showing... after the credits have run, you hear "Help us - we are still alive".... an indication that after all of that they lived... or perhaps just died alone and burried alive... Soooo brilliant.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 4, 2008 Author Share Posted February 4, 2008 * The bit when they're in the stairs and the 'spider' attacks them!!! * The bit when they see the first explosion and all the bits start raining down on them! * The bit when they're on the bridge and he's killed (the first lead to die and SO unexpected I can't put it into words!!) * The bit when they're on the street and the army marches past them... you could just feel it, the rumble of the tracks on your chest. The fear. OH MY GOD! I still get excited!!! I went to see it on Saturday, a pretty full screening, and at the end there was silence. No one chatting, no one getting up. People just sat, in awe. This film has changed cinema. For a Hollywood film to kill off it's leads left right and centre, to answer NO questions about where the monster came from, what it was etc etc OH MY GOD! Amazing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beardy Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Do you get to see the monster then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 4, 2008 Author Share Posted February 4, 2008 Do you get to see the monster then? I can't believe you've read this without seeing it mate! You're mental! But yes, yes you do! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beardy Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 I can't believe you've read this without seeing it mate! You're mental! But yes, yes you do! The problem is, i dont read! Im not overly assed about spoilers as i always read them on IMDB! I have been looking forward to this, but either way i dont care if i spoil it, i spoilt I am Legend, and it was still gash! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigfinLatic Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 I can't believe you've read this without seeing it mate! You're mental! But yes, yes you do! Part of the brilliance is that you see the monster all the time... you get a pretty fulll shot of the beggar about 20 minutes into the film.... but because of the panic and eratic nature of the filming you never really feel like you see it... its always glances and snapshots... this film is essentially about people, not a monster... The bit Ackey talks about with the army is fantastic - brilliant direction where you see the full terror of the main protagonists.. the army hitting it with everything they have, and Hud (the cameraman) doesnt know where to look, at his friends, the soldiers or the 'thing' - brilliantly he concentrates on his friends and thier terror - this fim isnt about the monster... its about 4 people desperately trying to survive... what is causing the terror is irrelevant - it is essentially the first monster movie where the monster isnt the star... There are then two other brillaint "reveals" - stood on top of a destroyed skscraper as in the background you see the monster coming straight for them..... and then the brilliant final shot - for hud anyway... where post helicopter crash, and in bright daylight in the serenity of central park (brillaintly located in the text at the start as Area 48 = formally known as central park) he suddely looks up... only to see the big guy staring straight back at him.... smell ya later... ... That bit with the first film crew to get to the scene - when they are watching it on tv in a store... "What is it, I dont know, but there appears to be bits falling off it... cant quite see what they are - oh, OH MY GOD!" - just brilliant - you just about see something even more scary than the big monster itself... you know you will see them again.. though you have no idea what "they" are... and as ackey says, the monster itself is never explained - "We dont know what it is - but its winning" .. an image of the utter destruction... thousands of people have dies before they even knew what hit them... ... another awesome scene - in the army medical centre ... "We've got a biter! We've got a biter"... again, you only see what they see, and the amount of blood or what actually happens to Marlena is never explained... I cant speak higher about this film - I dont think I have ever used the word 'brilliant' so much! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daboke Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I managed to spoil it completely by finding a site that shows clips, summing the whole film in under 3 minutes.... It's not out here in Japan til April!!! For those that stay after the credits - you see the main 2 from a previous filming on the camera. They are on a ferris wheel and, with a few seconds left of film, she says "it was a great day". Irony. Supposedly you also see something fall into the ocean when the camera pans, but I couldn't. Then the camera goes blank....... and you hear "what now?"... but it's not the voice of anyone known. Questions, questions, questions.... That's the way it should be. Sequel please! (in 3 mins) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigfinLatic Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I managed to spoil it completely by finding a site that shows clips, summing the whole film in under 3 minutes.... It's not out here in Japan til April!!! For those that stay after the credits - you see the main 2 from a previous filming on the camera. They are on a ferris wheel and, with a few seconds left of film, she says "it was a great day". Irony. Supposedly you also see something fall into the ocean when the camera pans, but I couldn't. Then the camera goes blank....... and you hear "what now?"... but it's not the voice of anyone known. Questions, questions, questions.... That's the way it should be. Sequel please! (in 3 mins) You bloomin dont! I know this bit you are referring to... but this is at the end of the main film... when the monster bit finishes.... ... well after the credits you just hear a static come on... and you hear "Help us... we're alive" ... this is way after the bit you refer to... and as I say, i only saw it cos I caught the end of the previous showing when I went into the screen... If there is ever, ever, even a hint of a sequel to this film I will have a full on strop and declare Abrams and Cloverfield as the biggest waste of space ever committed to film... as you say, the greatest thing about this fim is the questions it leaves you with.... and reveal all sequel will destroy everything it is about... it is a true one-off... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 5, 2008 Author Share Posted February 5, 2008 You bloomin dont! I know this bit you are referring to... but this is at the end of the main film... when the monster bit finishes.... ... well after the credits you just hear a static come on... and you hear "Help us... we're alive" ... this is way after the bit you refer to... and as I say, i only saw it cos I caught the end of the previous showing when I went into the screen... If there is ever, ever, even a hint of a sequel to this film I will have a full on strop and declare Abrams and Cloverfield as the biggest waste of space ever committed to film... as you say, the greatest thing about this fim is the questions it leaves you with.... and reveal all sequel will destroy everything it is about... it is a true one-off... I want a sequal to give me answers... but I don't actually want it... that's part of the enjoyment. You come out and you only know what they know. You don't have some general reading aloud his mission report like that's a normal thing to do. You don't have some amazingly sexy female scientist giving you a genetic breakdown of it... because in the "real world" of the film you wouldn't know that yourself... that's why its scary and that's why your in constant suspense!! A follow up, or a prequal or whatever would destroy this films credibility! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 (edited) I want a sequal to give me answers... but I don't actually want it... that's part of the enjoyment. You come out and you only know what they know. You don't have some general reading aloud his mission report like that's a normal thing to do. You don't have some amazingly sexy female scientist giving you a genetic breakdown of it... because in the "real world" of the film you wouldn't know that yourself... that's why its scary and that's why your in constant suspense!! A follow up, or a prequal or whatever would destroy this films credibility! A sequel would ruin it. The brilliance of the film is that there is nothing new in the story or the characters..but the way it is done is fantastic. A whole film shot through one camera and pretty much one pair of eyes. This film will be studied for years to come by film students because it is one fine example of one persons gaze. 85 minutes through one camera. Has it ever been done before this well? Edited February 5, 2008 by dave_ragg1984 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 5, 2008 Author Share Posted February 5, 2008 A sequel would ruin it. The brilliance of the film is that there is nothing new in the story or the characters..but the way it is done is fantastic. A whole film shot through one camera and pretty much one pair of eyes. This film will be studied for years to come by film students because it is one fine example of one persons gaze. 85 minutes through one camera. Has it ever been done before this well? Never. And I don't see it ever being beaten... the new Dead film (Romero's) is going to be the same style apparently and I can already tell it's going to be a crap version of this! Told you it was good, didn't I Dave!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Never. And I don't see it ever being beaten... the new Dead film (Romero's) is going to be the same style apparently and I can already tell it's going to be a crap version of this! Told you it was good, didn't I Dave!? Yes you did. Although it isnt the "best film ever ©" like some people will have you believe, its probably the best horror movie I have ever seen. I actually felt sick at the end of the film. I dont know how much of that was because I was still delicate from the night before, but that camera work did not help. I dont know if it will change cinema though. Like you say, the next Romero film is going to be shot like that, and it will be rubbish. I can see a lot of poor imitations on the style before people get bored of it. It will certainly be an all time horror classic though. Think id give it 8.5/10, maybe 9/10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I managed to get in for free. I wanted my money back at the end. Reminded me of open water. Didnt like it i'm afriad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 6, 2008 Author Share Posted February 6, 2008 Yes you did. Although it isnt the "best film ever ©" like some people will have you believe, its probably the best horror movie I have ever seen. I actually felt sick at the end of the film. I dont know how much of that was because I was still delicate from the night before, but that camera work did not help. I dont know if it will change cinema though. Like you say, the next Romero film is going to be shot like that, and it will be rubbish. I can see a lot of poor imitations on the style before people get bored of it. It will certainly be an all time horror classic though. Think id give it 8.5/10, maybe 9/10. I think the way this film changes cinema is not in the construction or cinematic style... which is the first thing that hits you about it... but instead is the non-American blockbuster story nature of the story. Think back trough any American film, be it action/horror/adventure etc. which does not have a conclusive (and HAPPY!) ending. Or one which does not tell you what the 'baddy' actually was. Or one which does not let you see the baddy in full, clear, panoramic shot until less than 10 mins from the end!!! That is how it can/could redefine American cinema. Fnally showing that a film based on IF's and BUT's, maybe's and unknowns can be popular and most importantly for the studios : PROFITABLE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 I think the way this film changes cinema is not in the construction or cinematic style... which is the first thing that hits you about it... but instead is the non-American blockbuster story nature of the story. Think back trough any American film, be it action/horror/adventure etc. which does not have a conclusive (and HAPPY!) ending. Or one which does not tell you what the 'baddy' actually was. Or one which does not let you see the baddy in full, clear, panoramic shot until less than 10 mins from the end!!! That is how it can/could redefine American cinema. Fnally showing that a film based on IF's and BUT's, maybe's and unknowns can be popular and most importantly for the studios : PROFITABLE! IF's and BUT's, maybe's and unknowns can be popular...and inevitably lead to a sequel which ends up ruing the whole thing. Same old bloody Hollywood: Untitled JJ Abrams Cloverfield Sequel (2009) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigfinLatic Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 I managed to get in for free. I wanted my money back at the end. Reminded me of open water. Didnt like it i'm afriad. You are jokin... right?? right?? I am very confused... how does a film about a monster attack on a city remind you of a film of people stranded in the sea... sure you didnt see a re-run of adrift??? Honestly - I would like a full justification young man - in fact, this may affect our relationship until you explain your reasoning... and I tell you that i'm right.... I sense me drunkenly rambling at you about its brilliance will happen for several hours on saturday... Yes you did. Although it isnt the "best film ever ©" like some people will have you believe, its probably the best horror movie I have ever seen. I actually felt sick at the end of the film. I dont know how much of that was because I was still delicate from the night before, but that camera work did not help. I dont know if it will change cinema though. Like you say, the next Romero film is going to be shot like that, and it will be rubbish. I can see a lot of poor imitations on the style before people get bored of it. It will certainly be an all time horror classic though. Think id give it 8.5/10, maybe 9/10. I think this is a fair assesment, but as horror/Sci-fi is (in my opinion) the most powerful and influential genre in cinema (lets not get started on this one ) and as you say this is the best horror film ever made... then in my opinion it is the best film I have ever seen.... the other part of your point is slightly contradictory... the fact there will be so many poor imitations is a testiment to the influence of the film.... the film that does it first is truly great and changes cinema.. the rest are just copies.... So, that would be Blair Witch that is the great one then! Think back trough any American film, be it action/horror/adventure etc. which does not have a conclusive (and HAPPY!) ending. Or one which does not tell you what the 'baddy' actually was. Or one which does not let you see the baddy in full, clear, panoramic shot until less than 10 mins from the end!!! That is how it can/could redefine American cinema. Fnally showing that a film based on IF's and BUT's, maybe's and unknowns can be popular and most importantly for the studios : PROFITABLE! Brilliant point well put - why this fims is the first and Blair Witch isnt.... however it is a long arguement.... as BW could be classed as a studio film.. but it is forgotten because of its balls sequel... speaking of which.. IF's and BUT's, maybe's and unknowns can be popular...and inevitably lead to a sequel which ends up ruing the whole thing. Same old bloody Hollywood: Untitled JJ Abrams Cloverfield Sequel (2009) Noooooooo! I can sort of lt it off if it does not try to do the same thing again and it remains unexplained.... but if not... aaaarrgggghhh! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 You are jokin... right?? right?? I am very confused... how does a film about a monster attack on a city remind you of a film of people stranded in the sea... sure you didnt see a re-run of adrift??? Honestly - I would like a full justification young man - in fact, this may affect our relationship until you explain your reasoning... and I tell you that i'm right.... I sense me drunkenly rambling at you about its brilliance will happen for several hours on saturday... It reminded me of open water because it was made with a $600 video camera, several never-before-and-never-again heard of actors and a plot that doesnt make any sense because there isnt one! I was waiting for it to start all the way through. Seriously, if they made a sequal, with some real dialogue, a plot and some sort of outcome then it might sell well. I really hope this is the first of two or three. If it is, brilliant. Couldnt fault it. If not. No way. Like it or not people like films with a story line they can follow, sometimes with sub plots breaking through at points. There was no ending as such. Just a nuke attack or something. What happened to them? Did they die? How was the camera recovered? Did the monster die? What is the monster? How did it come to Be? So many questions that are not answered. As I said, if its a two-part or three-part. Fine, but this movie as a stand alone doesnt work. Ok, i get the idea that hollywood dresses everything up and its nicly gift wrapped with a big red blue bow on top with a nice fairytale ending. I like that its something different but it should have something at the end/middle/beginning/actually start the damn film!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 7, 2008 Author Share Posted February 7, 2008 IF's and BUT's, maybe's and unknowns can be popular...and inevitably lead to a sequel which ends up ruing the whole thing. Same old bloody Hollywood: Untitled JJ Abrams Cloverfield Sequel (2009) Noooooooo! My thought's exactly!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 the film that does it first is truly great and changes cinema.. the rest are just copies.... I suppose it depends which way you look at it. You could see it as Cloverfield being the one that changes things with others following...or you could see the others following as a sign of cinema doing what it always does by continuously copying itself. (not sure if i just made that point very well, but at least I know what I mean ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.