|
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Cloverfield (2008)
|
Mark Strube
Master Film Handler
Posts: 322
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 01-16-2008 12:21 AM
For those concerned with spoilers, I'm staying away from those completely.
I caught this at a promo screening the studio did at our theatre. (Ironic, since it's a Marcus we won't be carrying the film, yet they rent out an UltraScreen to generate hype in the area.)
First of all: this movie isn't for everyone, and it had to be advertised in the hype-generating way in which it was in order to really work as an experience that sucks you in. I can see some will feel a bit let down by the ending, however I believe that it had a strong enough effect on me that a standard ending would've almost felt wrong. I haven't found myself this tense throughout an entire movie in a long, long time. Say what you will about the concept or storyline, this is a very short movie (under 90min) that really keeps things moving along at a great pace, I can't imagine someone watching this (without spoilers) who finds themselves completely disinterested. Yes, it's shaky handycam-style cinematography (if you can call it that)... however for a change I believe it was effective and well-done. If this was shot like your standard action/thriller, it would've detached us from the characters and killed most of the excitement. If this type of camera work bothers you, avoid very large screens. However even the Ultra wasn't too bad, considering it wasn't at its full 72 foot wide size (flat format). Also, an auditorium with a great sound system is a must for this one. Our Ultra's 12 subs were really moving some air.
Highly recommended! This is one of those "experience" movies that might not work with repeat viewings, however the first is a great one. It brings a brand new perspective to the "giant monster" genre, and it's an effective one.
[ 01-19-2008, 10:49 PM: Message edited by: Mark Strube ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Wilson
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 109
From: Paoli, IN, USA
Registered: May 2004
|
posted 01-19-2008 06:18 PM
I love movies, all kinds of movies, but all I could think of the whole dam movie was, Blair Witch, Blair Witch, Blair Witch, am I actually sitting here watching Blair Witch all over again. The actual run time on this movie minus the credits and the trailers was a mere 70 minutes!
As a professional photographer, I think the shaky cam think, is good if you use it sparingly, but not for the whole dam movie. I felt like this movie could have been so much more than what it ended up to be. It was a Cheap made movie that was not that good.
In my opinion, its a one week wonder and then its over. It will have very little HBO appeal after the initial run. It, like the Blair Witch, will go into the vault and never be seen again! What a waste of time! Did I say I have an opinion on these kinds of movies.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 01-19-2008 08:04 PM
Being the world's biggest hater of the shaky/epileptic/Paul Dumbshit Greengrass cam, I will state that I thought it worked in this movie. This is the first time I have EVER seen this effect work, and it works only because of the storyline. Had that not been there, it wouldn't have been as believable.
That being said, I went into this movie not wanting to see it because of all the hype, but decided that since I knew it was only an hour and ten minutes long that I could sit through this "tv show" just so I would be able to understand what people were talking about in conversations of upcoming weeks. I did enjoy it though. Is this a great movie? No. It this a movie I am dying to see again? No. I may not even ever watch it again. Was I glad I saw it? Yes. Would I recommend it? Yes. Were there unbelievable or stupid things in it? Yes, but sometimes you just have to let it go.
That being said, I didn't know videocameras had night vision these days, but a friend watching the movie with me swore he had a friend that had that feature, so until Joe comes in here to verify, I'll just assume that some videocameras now have night vision. Regardless, I do want to know what make and model videocamera that was, because I've never seen a camera microphone do such a phenomenal job of capturing discrete 5.1 audio!!!
3.5 out of 5
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
. Like "The Thing" and "Alien" and several other similar films Cloverfield will certainly go on to become a classic monster flick.... 
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic