Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 4003256" data-attributes="member: 32740">SPOILERS BELOWand I'm not gonna use spoiler tabs, etc.  Too clunky for an open discussion/criticism.[sblock]---Saw it last night and found it enjoyable.  I avoided any hype about the movie beforehand - I always do avoid hype about movies I'm actually interested in as it has always lessened the experience and clouded/colored my objective judgement of them.In short, it was Blair Witch meets Godzilla.  It had some distinct advantages over BWP.  First was that BWP was NOT a visually oriented story but mental, cerebral, general dread.  The shaky cam then left nothing for the viewer to LOOK for.  Cloverfield, however, could at least keep you looking for more/better glimpses of the monster and the destruction it caused - which monument had it damaged/destroyed.I saw it with a friend and as we walked out one of the first things he suggested was that it could be redone from a different POV.  I thought it was a clever idea and now I suspect he was only repeating this idea that he'd heard elsewhere.  Still, I'd go see it, even if for no other reason than, as suggested, it's never been DONE before.  I think it would be an fascinating experiment.The acting was a bit stiff in places and the love story angle just did not work.  As with so many movies there was a mistake in assuming that STATING that a relationship exists is equal to SHOWING visually that a relationship exists.  It was therefore difficult to believe the love story.  It was also difficult to identify with the characters as much as we might want to as the establishing scenes at the party wound up being quite superficial.  When the action really starts we still don't know any more about the characters.  I think it would have been better to have run it strictly as a get-out-of-Manhattan plot than a rescue-my supposed girlfriend plot, especially as there was NO real motivation demonstrated for anyone but the boyfriend to walk into that level of danger.And as for RigaMortus questions:1) Did you feel the ending of the movie was fulfiiling?It FIT the rest of the movie, but it was understandably unfulfilling as it leaves the plot unresolved.2) Was there any sort of "resolution" at the end of the movie?Nope.  Everybody dies.  Well, not EVERYBODY - one main character was airlifted out near the end.3) About how far into the movie does the action start?I didn't check my watch, but maybe... 15 minutes?  And the action begins without any prelude/foreshadowing.4) About how har into the movie until you fully see "the monster"?The first fleeting glimpse is 5 minutes or so after the action starts.  As the movie unfolds you get more and better views of it.  I'd say the first really decent look at it isn't until well after the first half.  The two best shots of any stability and duration are at the end - one from the air and one from directly beneath.  Otherwise if you see the whole thing - you see it only very briefly, if you see it for any length of time then you don't get to see the whole thing at once.  The camera doesn't ever follow the monster - it follows the characters, or looks away as it would when held by a person FLEEING from the monster.  You get to see it - and then you RUN away or towards shelter.It's not the greatest thing since Citizen Kane, but it is enjoyable.  Unfortunately the shaky-cam thing is a problem for a lot of people, yet it is APPROPRIATE for the live-on-the-scene POV.[/sblock]Since the thread isn't marked as 'SPOILERS' and most people are still using spoiler tags, please think of others and use spoiler tags yourself. the sblock is a simple little thing to us.Thanks - Plane Sailing</blockquote>

Verification