Cloverfield

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
And what I wish to understand is what basis you have to claim you and indeed today's "generation", are sophisticated and analytical when they also NEED, not want, NEED everything laid out with ribbons on to have any idea on how to understand it.

You just don't get why we enjoyed it because you didn't. I simply do not understand YOUR claims because they contradict one another.

I wasn't the one in this thread being it's hype-man. I paid no attention and then just went to see it. I went in with more objectivity than you did, whether you like to admit it or not.

And THAT is precisely why your argument holds absolutely no ground. Don't sit there claiming you are a part of this mass of smart, analytical and intelligent movie fans, when you're simply insulted that you didn't get the movie, and therefore refuse to admit there is anything there you aren't seeing, and blame the movie.

You lack the inability to discuss, you cannot handle directors leaving the endings ambigious because you are NOT capable of being imaginatively analytical. You just want to be.

No, you built yourself up. You assumed they would tell you, that it'd be open and shut. Abrams never indicated it would be anything of the sort, that's YOUR problem, homeboy, not anyone else's. Abrams told nobody anything about the movie because he wanted it to have impact. He only ever released two trailers and a poster, with a few nothing-statements that didn't detail the movie in anyway. How, from this, did you get the impression he was guaranteeing what you needed from this movie?

He didn't, you assumed, you messed up.

I HOPE they don't cater to your kind of viewer with the next one, because it happened with The Matrix.

Well it's evident that you weren't who he was aiming for, and you are blaming HIM for your own assumptions, it's not his fault.

I can't relate to being pushed off, must suck.

Anyway, like I said, you dropped the ball. Not Abrams.

-AC

? lol

how is it "my fault"how'd "i mess up", how is it "my problem" and how'd i "drop the ball". lol? J.J. did the movie and if he caters to your kind again with pt.2 he should resign. Cause he'd suck as bad as you getting any. He'd let down and make both movie worse than '98 Godzilla.

And i don't wanna be anything. That's you. I just want the full story.

And what? lol, i didn't get the movie? I never said that, the voices in your head may've told you that . I have an issue with how it ended, is that ok? You sound highly upset just cause i saw things differently. The world doesn't revolve around your view.

When a film is done only through subjective cameras, like this and Blair Witch, it's not possible to do a complete ending that sews up all the loose ends while still staying true to the premise. The ending will have to be somewhat open ended for the style to be plausible; these films are supposed to try and capture realism, and in real life not everything wraps up into a neat little package. It's pretty clear that these types of films simply aren't for you, Fist, and that's no fault of the film, it's just your preference and nothing more.

If he did make a sequel using the same style, but then dumbed it down so that it was a complete, generic "here's everything" ending, it would betray the premise and genre, by making it utterly simple and cinematic, when these types of films are supposed to be anything but.

Originally posted by Röland
As AC said the first Matrix was awesome, the next two sequels felt like they tried too hard to explain everything, it just didn't work out.

That's the way I see it anyway.

Forget that, the Matrix 1, 2, and 3 films were a good story. Pt 3. had that ending i didn't kinda like. How could ruthless machines make a pact and the sunny thing going on w/e. But it didn't let down like this.

I like the animatrix, as well. I like side stories.

And speaking of side stories, I read that there's a Cloverfield comic book prequel, as well.

Fist, you're just digging a hole and proving my point (Nice jab about the sex by the way, but it's good, you should try it with a girl).

Your claim of sophisticated and smart audiences is looking even worse than when you first made it. You wanted to get it, you're insulted that you didn't, but you refuse to admit it, so you're insisting it was just poorly done.

Point proven above. Cloverfield wasn't for you, you clearly did not understand it, so just watch Rambo or something, maybe the third Matrix, and let Abrams focus on making movies to satisfy the people who he aimed it for.

-AC

Originally posted by BackFire
When a film is done only through subjective cameras, like this and Blair Witch, it's not possible to do a complete ending that sews up all the loose ends while still staying true to the premise. The ending will have to be somewhat open ended for the style to be plausible; these films are supposed to try and capture realism, and in real life not everything wraps up into a neat little package. It's pretty clear that these types of films simply aren't for you, Fist, and that's no fault of the film, it's just your preference and nothing more.

If he did make a sequel using the same style, but then dumbed it down so that it was a complete, generic "here's everything" ending, it would betray the premise and genre, by making it utterly simple and cinematic, when these types of films are supposed to be anything but.

So to close a movie is to dumb it down? How dumb is that?

Look, I know subjective artsy type of people don't care about about how bad something is as long as it looks meaningful. As in this case, Maybe this film was a visual thing more than anything else.

i personally liked the ending as it fits in perfectly with the situation of being a bunch of random nobodys being caught up in an event that is much bigger than themselves

the same premise was taken with the remake of war of the worlds...again it was from the viewpoint of a nobody who really didn't have a clue what was going on and was just trying to survive...then they tacked on the explanation at the end when in reality he would never have known what was happening at that that point

cloverfield could well have gone the same way but i for one am glad it didn't tack on some military/government explanation to give "closure"

the closure for the characters was being in the middle of a city that was about to get bombed flat and generally being scared shitless and facing up to the inevitable...pretty much like what any other nobody would be like if they were stuck in the same situation

as for everyone saying "abrams meant this" "abrams meant that"...i dont know the extent of his input into the film but he didn't write or direct it and little credit seems to be being given to Matt Reeves

http://imdb.com/title/tt1179933/

just noticed that ^

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
So to close a movie is to dumb it down? How dumb is that?

For someone analytical you pretty much balls up every single comment someone makes.

He means to close it just to please people who can't work it out alone, or spend time just being imaginative, is to dumb it down.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Look, I know subjective artsy type of people don't care about about how bad something is as long as it looks meaningful. As in this case, Maybe this film was a visual thing more than anything else.

See, this proves you truly did not get the movie.

-AC

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
So to close a movie is to dumb it down? How dumb is that?

Look, I know subjective artsy type of people don't care about about how bad something is as long as it looks meaningful. As in this case, Maybe this film was a visual thing more than anything else.

In this case, yes. Because that's precisely why they'd do it, to dumb it down for audiences so they don't have to think about it. This is simply taking into consideration the type of film that it is, the genre and style and all that, and what they were trying to achieve. Altering the ending for people who simply don't want to think would obviously be dumbing it down.

Again, with this type of film you should know by now that they can't do an ending with full closure, because that's not realistic. These films aren't mean to be friendly to cinematic grammar, they ignore certain things that are necessary for normal traditional films in order to enhance the immersion and plausibility. An open ending that forces you to think and come to your own conclusion is one such thing.

Really, what more did you want the movie to tell you?

Spoiler:
it said that the characters died, and the monster lived

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
So to close a movie is to dumb it down? How dumb is that?

Look, I know subjective artsy type of people don't care about about how bad something is as long as it looks meaningful. As in this case, Maybe this film was a visual thing more than anything else.

The main purpose of the film was so you, the viewer would get into the shoes of the people in the movie, feel what they're going through and not a gaint-monster-attacks-city rehash flick.

Which part of that can't you get?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
For someone analytical you pretty much balls up every single comment someone makes.

He means to close it just to please people who can't work it out alone, or spend time just being imaginative, is to dumb it down.

See, this proves you truly did not get the movie.

-AC

me simplify it for your brain A.C. Let me tell you my opinion: (read it slowly)

The ending sucked. Period. It sucked cock, AC. And that's it.

I don't have an issue with you thinking it sucked, the reason you think it sucked, however, makes you a person who happens to be quite incapable of figuring anything out alone.

You need things spoonfed.

All this only to go with the inevitable retard move of you giving MORE money and interest to Abrams for Cloverfield 2.

Go watch American Pie, it's more suitable. There's a beginning, middle, end. Nice, short words and clean camera shots.

-AC

nothing you say, including your personal attacks/insults towards me will not make the ending any suck less.

Despite the one you made prior, about sex? Don't dish if you can't take.

And I'm not trying to convert you, I don't want to. I'd prefer it if the next movie is aimed at us again and you fail to understand it.

-AC

hey, you insulted first. i'm just attacking back. as i'll always keep doing.

And you just keep prefering. ill always fail to understand why people make endless movies.

Mine was more of a veiled joke, but I'm sure you picked that up, Mr. Analysis.

It wasn't endless, you just dislike how open the end was, cos you're a happy meal movie-goer.

-AC

The end wasn't really "open-ended" if you think about it, as the movie was about a certain group of people and what they experienced during a monster-attack. We know what they went through from the very beginning, middle and we know how it ended for them.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Mine was more of a veiled joke, but I'm sure you picked that up, Mr. Analysis.

It wasn't endless, you just dislike how open the end was, cos you're a happy meal movie-goer.

-AC

Happy meals or not. The ending still sucked cocked. Not matter how you swallow it, A.C. (hehe)

listen, this is where discussions like this start to become undesirable. It looks like anytime now we're gonna get personal and completely not talk about Cloverfield at all and just purely lash with insulting each other, with no end to it like CLoverfield, with neither of us backing down no matter the cost. I'm really here to talk about Cloverfield and Colverfield only. And not how you feel. And i expect the same from you. But that's not gonna happen.

Im not offering a truce just a demand. Let's get back to solely Cloverfield and not waste time with peepee caca jokes that'll only cause us to stray from the topic.

If not, insult away and say your last words to me. I won't even reply back. I'll just hit that button. You can have the last insult. If you don't want to talk about Cloverfield only on here then you're going on ignore forever, mark my words. i don't come on here to waste time on irrelevancies. and i could give two shits if don't care. Im not on here to play.

So now, where were we. Ah, Cloverfield

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Happy meals or not. The ending still sucked cocked. Not matter how you swallow it, A.C. (hehe)

Are you proposing this as a fact?

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
listen, this is where discussions like this start to become undesirable. It looks like anytime now we're gonna get personal and completely not talk about Cloverfield at all and just purely lash with insulting each other, with no end to it like CLoverfield, with neither of us backing down no matter the cost. I'm really here to talk about Cloverfield and Colverfield only. And not how you feel. And i expect the same from you. But that's not gonna happen.

Im not offering a truce just a demand. Let's get back to solely Cloverfield and not waste time with peepee caca jokes that'll only cause us to stray from the topic.

If not, insult away and say your last words to me. I won't even reply back. I'll just hit that button. You can have the last insult. If you don't want to talk about Cloverfield only on here then you're going on ignore forever, mark my words. i don't come on here to waste time on irrelevancies. and i could give two shits if don't care. Im not on here to play.

What do you wish to speak about? You don't even understand the movie, as everyone here, not just me, can see. I don't need to back down or push forward, your interpretation of the movie is wrong in conjunction with how it was intended.

You keep banging on about how much you don't understand why they did what they did, and how much you want an ending (It had an ending, just one you didn't like, it's not an infinite movie is it?). What more is there to discuss?

We're not insulting each other, I made a joke, you threw an insult, I sent one back. It was humour, but the debate has honestly become pointless. You don't understand the movie, so there's no point discussing it with you, unless you actually have a new topic.

-AC

there's a good laddy.

Ok, my take. Cloverfield is footage of a monster attack in n.y.c., essentially. Footage found by the U.S. military. The showing of it is presented as a briefing shown to intelligence officials. That's the practical/objective view.

The subjective/artsy view calls it a love story and/or a trial of the human spirit with moments that made you both laugh and cry..

As emotional as the latter view is, that may've been the case from a gguys perspective. But both views logical depending on the type of guy you are.

It's called denotation and connotation, brush up on it.