Cloverfield

[helen]

Oh yeah, and that trailer just before the movie was intriguing. The one shot on home video cameras at some guy's surprise party. It ends with an unseen monster in the city throwing huge fireballs around. That one looks like it has some potential.

The two things that made this preview intriguing:

1) The background sounded more or less like Godzilla.
2) At the end of the preview you get a release date but no title (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1060277/) for this movie. Of course you get a release date of January 18, 2008 and J.J. Abrams is involved in it in some way.

[zff]

The fact that it's so similar to the Godzilla trailer concerns me. Godzilla had a GREAT trailer, but it SUCKED. This new movie appears to be yet another monster movie with a great trailer. I hope this one meets expectations.

[helen]

I wonder if the monster is the same one from the one in Lost? Or better yet a parent monster looking for it's kid monster (the kid being the one on the island) and it's pissed because it can't find it's kid?

*sigh* 6 more months.

[Hellbent]

Please change your thread title to 'Cloverfield'

[pzarquon]

Looks like 'Cloverfield' remains the working, perhaps code, title. I love how even IMDB has 'Untitled J.J. Abrams Project (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1060277/)' as its name. Jan. 18, 2008, though? That seems relatively near, for a major film project. At least for one without a name. The closest thing to an official website is 1-18-08.com (http://www.1-18-08.com/). Word is marketing will have a strong 'viral' online component, which the blogosphere has been tracking (http://blogsearch.google.com/blogsearch?q=cloverfield).

I agree that the trailers for 'Godzilla' were better than the movie, though. Frankly, the opening credits were the best part. But, I'm a fan of J.J. Abrams, so I'm certainly curious what comes out of this.

[Hellbent]

Ive read speculation that its Godzilla or Voltron.

[helen]

I love how even IMDB has 'Untitled J.J. Abrams Project (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1060277/)' as its name.

IMDb does that from time to time when dealing with new projects without a name, but this is the first time I can think that an unnamed project actually aired a preview.

Jan. 18, 2008, though? That seems relatively near, for a major film project. At least for one without a name.
Maybe it's has a small budget for a movie but it might be around the size of a few TV episodes. It might be of the type of Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?t=2699) kind of movie, mostly actors around a green screen. Add in some little known or unknown actors and you save some bucks on the budget.

Maybe Greg Grunberg will be in this movie, hopefully not as a person who demostrates how the monster actually works.

[pzarquon]

Ive read speculation that its Godzilla or Voltron.Voltron would be interesting, but I'd expect more news would've leaked out given the fan base and licensing requirements. (Voltron is still trademarked, isn't it?) I'd agree that Godzilla still needs a worthy contemporary retelling, but I don't know if Abrams will be able to give us that. At least, not without some too-clever twist.

[helen]

It might be a Godzilla vs some monster flick considering the US Godzilla version doesn't generate fireballs. Or the fireballs in the preview might have been generated by weapons that missed the monster and hit something like gas stations or gas trucks or whatever is around that can blow up.

[DiverDown808]

Oh yeah, and that trailer just before the movie was intriguing. The one shot on home video cameras at some guy's surprise party. It ends with an unseen monster in the city throwing huge fireballs around. That one looks like it has some potential.

BTW, the unamed jjabrams trailer is 'cloverfield'

Cloverfield ? I thought it was a trailer for War of the Worlds 2. I looked up Cloverfield and couldn't find much....except Abrams is working on a new Star Trek movie. I'll keep an eye out for both of these....

How did you like the preview for Balls of Fury ? LOL Talk about Buzz's stupid movies that make you laugh. Christopher Walken is a comedic genius LOL

DD

[zff]

Maybe it's the start of Lost season 4? Or a side story of something that happened when the hatch exploded at the end of Season 2?

[helen]

The Apple Trailers (http://www.apple.com/trailers/) site has a preview (http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/11808/) to this movie and they are listing it as 1-18-08.

[Pomai]

I too was intrigued by that Transformer's trailer. The funniest part was when someone in our audience yelled out after it ended and was silent... "THAT'S GONNA' BE SO AWESOME!". Everyone in the theater cracked up after he said that.

Maybe it will be Ultraman! Nah, but no "space rays" visible, so likely not.

Or.. it could be the trailer to Transformers 2. :D

[DiverDown808]

Nice

My post above seems so out of place, doesn't it ? It used to be on the Transformers thread, when there was a discussion about trailers that were seen during the movie. I guess Megatron thought I was threadjacking the post about his movie.

Anyway, the Cloverfield movie is going to be about Ghidera (sp?) the three-headed flying dragon. I read it somewhere. Ok, I wrote it down and read it, but mark my words.........Ghidera hits the planet in 2008.

hehehehe hahahahaha

Transformers Rocks.......wait, I'm not on that thread....J.J. Abrams Rocks !!!

:rolleyes:

[StephS]

I haven't seen Transformers yet because I'm broke, but lucky for me they had the "Cloverfield" trailer over on YouTube. Here it is:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=m9aYjsW32Ok

[helen]

The Apple movie trailer site for this movie/project points to a page (http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/11808/) that shows parts of New York with smoke coming from the buildings in the background and the Statue of Liberty damaged.

The web site that Ryan linked in note #5 (1-18-08.com) adds a snapshot once a week so it's up to 5 photos with random time stamps. Some show photos of the party, some show shots of the aftermath.

[StephS]

A friend of mine and my husband brought back some posters from the San Diego Comic-Con, and one of the ones he gave us was for the "Cloverfield" project. It shows a decapitated Statue of Liberty in the foreground, with a very damaged NYC skyline in the back.

As for what it's going to be about, the scuttlebutt I'm hearing is that it's going to be something out of Lovecraft, maybe Cthulu.

[helen]

The web site that Ryan linked in note #5 (1-18-08.com) adds a snapshot once a week so it's up to 5 photos with random time stamps. Some show photos of the party, some show shots of the aftermath.

Nothing has been added to the 1-18-08.com website. It still shows the same 5 photos.

[helen]

Another photo got added a couple of weeks ago. And there is a way to flip the photos, one has to make a "J" motion on a photo to reveal the back. Two of the photos have text on the back and a third has what I believe Japanese characters.

[helen]

Network TV has been airing ads for this movie.
A clip of the movie can be seen at this website: http://www.cloverfieldmovie.com. You have to click on "Grab this Widget" to view it.
One of the episodes of Law & Order had a character saying "Cloverfield" and the way he was using the term seemed like it was a street in New York City.

[Random]

Hmm. I wonder how New Yorkers are going to react to this.

Still sensitive after 7 years.

[helen]

Saw the 10:40 pm showing of Cloverfield (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1060277/) at Ward Theater on Saturday night. It was showing it on one of the big screens there. While I got there just a few minutes before the lights were turned down I did notice that most of the seats in the upper and middle sections were taken so I opted for a seat in the 1st row of the middle section.

At the ticket office when you purchase a ticket they will inform you that the camera moves a lot.

There is no starting credits to the movie other than saying that they found the camera some place in Central Park and something relating to Cloverfield, then a play back of the what is on the camera (it hints it is a tape).

Initially it starts off a few weeks before the main event of the movie. While it does not contain any information of the monster it does tell the tale of Rob who happens to own the camera and Beth.

Then it cuts to a few weeks later where Rob's brother Jason and Jason's girl friend Lily are trying to throw a going away party for Rob who is leaving for Japan the next day. Jason has problems using Rob's camera so he enlist the aid of their friend Hud to operate the camera and to have Hud to record other guest's reactions to Rob leaving. It is Hud who is using the camera for the bulk of the movie.

Hud also manges to record one of the guest named Marlena before the monster starts it's rampage.

In a nutshell the movie is about these 6 people (Rob, Beth, Jason, Lily, Hud and Marlena) during the rampage and what they do.

For me I got mixed feelings about this movie and it has to do with using the point of view shown from a hand held camera. Then again it was a feature of the camera that showed something about the situation that the characters found themselves in.

The movie has some unanwsered questions that sort of begs a sequel which I would see assuming they don't use other peopls camera's point of view to tell the story.

[Kittrick]

Saw the 10:40 pm showing of Cloverfield (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1060277/) at Ward Theater on Saturday night. It was showing it on one of the big screens there. While I got there just a few minutes before the lights were turned down I did notice that most of the seats in the upper and middle sections were taken so I opted for a seat in the 1st row of the middle section.

At the ticket office when you purchase a ticket they will inform you that the camera moves a lot.

There is no starting credits to the movie other than saying that they found the camera some place in Central Park and something relating to Cloverfield, then a play back of the what is on the camera (it hints it is a tape).

Initially it starts off a few weeks before the main event of the movie. While it does not contain any information of the monster it does tell the tale of Rob who happens to own the camera and Beth.

Then it cuts to a few weeks later where Rob's brother Jason and Jason's girl friend Lily are trying to throw a going away party for Rob who is leaving for Japan the next day. Jason has problems using Rob's camera so he enlist the aid of their friend Hud to operate the camera and to have Hud to record other guest's reactions to Rob leaving. It is Hud who is using the camera for the bulk of the movie.

Hud also manges to record one of the guest named Marlena before the monster starts it's rampage.

In a nutshell the movie is about these 6 people (Rob, Beth, Jason, Lily, Hud and Marlena) during the rampage and what they do.

For me I got mixed feelings about this movie and it has to do with using the point of view shown from a hand held camera. Then again it was a feature of the camera that showed something about the situation that the characters found themselves in.

The movie has some unanwsered questions that sort of begs a sequel which I would see assuming they don't use other peopls camera's point of view to tell the story.

I read somewhere that it's possible that the sequel would show the same timeframe as the movie but from different people's perspectives. Soldiers maybe?

I didn't see this movie yet, but maybe this was the prequel to LOST or the monster's origins are on the mysterious island from the show and it was a Dharma project at the zoo...boy would that be a tie in!

[pzarquon]

I didn't see this movie yet, but maybe this was the prequel to LOST or the monster's origins are on the mysterious island from the show and it was a Dharma project at the zoo...boy would that be a tie in!As cool as a "Cloverfield" tie in to "LOST" would be, I'm pretty sure "LOST" would be where the story began. I mean, "LOST" is taking place (so far) in the 2004 to 2005 time frame, and I think "Cloverfield" is also set in its present (as in, today). It would be pretty dang cool if, over the next three seasons of "LOST," we see elements of a monster that is only fully revealed to be the same creature in the series finale.

I'm very curious about this movie, even if it's "Blair Witch" meets "Godzilla." The handheld camera work is going to be an issue for a lot of people. On the other hand, to have a monster/disaster movie told entirely from the point of view of someone who is usually just one of the little faceless ants running away in the million dollar effects shot in other flicks (which usually bring us to the White House or the military command room at some point, where grave declarations are made with melodramatic music).

And the film's construct is timely and relevant both in the 9/11 sense (there's no hesitation to draw the parallels, just as Godzilla was a direct reference on Hiroshima) and in the "kids pointing cameras at everything and themselves these days" sense.

The reviews at "Rotten Tomatoes (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cloverfield)" are mixed, but mostly positive.

[Honoruru]

The handheld camera work is going to be an issue for a lot of people.

It definitely is for me. I really wanted to see this movie, but warnings in many of the reviews (and apparently when you buy your ticket) made me decide to wait for the DVD release. I still remember being sick and almost throwing up watching "The Blair Witch Project." I think I actually liked that movie, and I'll problably like "Cloverfield," but it's difficult to remain objective and like something when it's making you want to vomit.

[buzz1941]

it's "Blair Witch" meets "Godzilla."

Exactly. If you've seen the preview, nothing in the film will surprise you. It's masterfully done, however -- making amazing stuff look like it was filmed "amateurishly." That notion was the genius of "Blair Witch." The style of filming drops the fourth wall.

[helen]

but it's difficult to remain objective and like something when it's making you want to vomit.
I had a couple of tall glasses of beer and a shot of scotch about a couple of hours before seeing this movie and during the movie I was munching on bananas and a bottle of water and I think what made me uncomfortable was sitting kind of close to the screen.

[pzarquon]

We snuck out to see it last night. A fun ride, and definitely a great concept. My wife was more bothered by the handheld camera work than she thought she'd be. But, well, there's still quite a lot to see between blurry pans and shots of feet.

I like that the cast was made up of relative unknowns, to add to the "found footage" feel. Except that everyone on screen was impossibly pretty. It was like a Gap ad in the middle of a horror flick.

I'm actually surprised by how much was shown of the monster... and think the film was more effective early on when you just caught fleeting glimpses. And the ending was a little abrupt, but then again, given the concept, quite fitting.

I couldn't help but wish "Cloverfield" did have a "LOST" link, somewhere deep down... given the fact that the mayhem began with a tanker shipwrecking at the Statue of Liberty, and the constant musing by Hud that maybe it was a government experiment gone wrong. Imagine if the end of "LOST" involved sending an unknown evil off to sea?

Anyway. I agree, this is a new vision for an otherwise well-worn storyline. Given its explicit commentary on the YouTube generation and self-obsessed youth compelled to record and broadcast everything and each other, I don't doubt there's going to be a whole rash of "first-person" movies in just about every genre.

[buzz1941]

The ancestor of this style was "84 Charlie MoPic"

[U'ilani]

Is the handheld camera work in Cloverfield comparable to what they did with Bourne Ultimatum? Anyone seen both and can advise?

[helen]

I haven't seen The Bourne Ultimatum or The Blair Witch Project so I can't compare Cloverfield to them. Two other movies that did use handheld camera work that I have seen are Narc (http://www.hawaiistories.com/archives/004860.shtml) and Three Kings. For those two movies the handheld camera work is very limited in it's on screen time (no more than 15 minutes) and is meant to show the point of view just behind of one character in the movie.

Cloverfield on the other hand with the exception of the ending credits and about 10 to 15 seconds worth of screen test patterns and some text that says Department of Defense, found Digital SD card and other text at the beginning of the movie the entire movie is shown from this handheld camera operated by one of the characters in the movie. For the most part you don't see the operator but the operator is saying stuff.

Hud who operates the camera for the bulk of the film says a lot of things and is normally in back of the group during the disaster part of the movie. During the party scene he is not operating the camera very well so you get to see people's head cut off, camera tilted, that sort of thing. It's during this part of the movie that it's the most humorous.

I just came from seeing the 5:40 pm showing of Cloverfield at Ward (#8) today. This time around I sat in the near the top of the middle section.

Two things to watch out and pay attention to in this movie. First of all are the clocks. The other is Rob and Beth's trip to Coney Island which is the events on April 27 while the main focus of the movie is May 22/23.

The Coney Island scene, the hint is look at the boat on the right hand side of the screen, something happens behind of the boat (to the left of the boat).

As far as staying to watch the credits, the ending music is pretty good and while there is no ending scene there is some sort of audio clip at the end and oh yeah a lot of people worked on this movie.

[sinjin]

Man I dug this film. It did produce one vomiter in the audience though. All were warned at the ticket window. The inside scoop says they have as many as five stories all taking place simultaneously during the attack. Look for multiple sequels. I may just have to go see it again.

[Lei Liko]

I threw up when I saw Blair Witch at the theater.

At least I made it to the car this time when I threw up. The boy said that he noticed a lot of people were closing their eyes during the movie because they started feeling sick too. You guys were lucky if you were warned at the ticket desk. We didn't get any sort of warning!

[helen]

When I saw the movie for the first time I was verbally warned by the ticket office that the camera moves. Thing is for me I have been waiting 6 months for this movie to come out, looking at the previews, visiting at one of the web sites and I am going to wimp out from not seeing this movie because of jerky camera movements. No way.

Then again if they made a version of this movie without the jerky camera movements I wouldn't complain either since one could explain it as another feature of Rob's camera.

I didn't get any sort of warning when I saw the movie the second time.

[sinjin]

When I saw the movie for the first time I was verbally warned by the ticket office that the camera moves. Thing is for me I have been waiting 6 months for this movie to come out, looking at the previews, visiting at one of the web sites and I am going to wimp out from not seeing this movie because of jerky camera movements. No way.

Then again if they made a version of this movie without the jerky camera movements I wouldn't complain either since one could explain it as another feature of Rob's camera.

I didn't get any sort of warning when I saw the movie the second time.But did you enjoy the film Helen?

[helen]

Like I said before I have mixed feelings about this movie. Do I hate it? No. Tolerate it? Sure. Enjoy it? Enough to see it at least one more time. Comes out on DVD? Depends on what the extra features has to offer.

[alohabear]

This is one BIG monster, It's parasites are scary enough. I liked this movie a lot because it was done different.
http://i29.tinypic.com/9tz4sl.jpg

[dyasu]

The camera movements made my fiancee a little ill, this film is certainly not for those with a low tolerance to motion sickness.

But I thought it was pretty good. The acting wasn't the greatest, but then again if I were to put myself into that situation I'm sure that some of my reactions would seem like real cheesy acting, too.

[helen]

Picked up the DVD today at Costco for $18. Package says they have deleted scenes but I suspect it would be from the hand held camera's point of view.

[DannyWilliams]

Cloverfield *LOL* is a movie you just watch ONCE its good enuff.
no need to see again.
Now a movie equivalent to Cloverfield lets saaaay
http://www.harryconnickjr.com/images/film-covers/indpendence%20day.jpg

I do not mind seeing OVER and OVER


ID4 touches all bases where the udda one IMO seemed lopsided

- I was booooooooored to death at the begining
- The movie FINALLY starts rolling when the explosions are seen in the movie
- I wished "Hud" the cam guy would shut the #$@ Up:D

[helen]

The Coney Island scene, the hint is look at the boat on the right hand side of the screen, something happens behind of the boat (to the left of the boat).

As far as staying to watch the credits, the ending music is pretty good and while there is no ending scene there is some sort of audio clip at the end and oh yeah a lot of people worked on this movie.

While this scene is watchable on a big movie screen you can barely see it on 21" TV screen. Had to zoom 4x to see the effect.

Mostly I have been listening the ending score a few times since that is not available anywhere else at this time.

Picked up the DVD today at Costco for $18. Package says they have deleted scenes but I suspect it would be from the hand held camera's point of view.

Only had 4 deleted scenes and 2 alternate endings. The interesting parts of the DVD were the behind the scenes of shooting the movie, the effects of the creature and the director's commentary.