• The Cloverfield Universe - Monsters, ARGs, and Sudden movies out of nowhere, oh my!
    229 replies, posted
What a fantastic move
Brilliant film. No much more to say. Gonna take a while to soak it all in.
To be honest, it felt like a trashy Syfy original film that had some additional scenes shot to fit into Cloverfield. Predictable story with uninteresting characters and some hokey dialogue.
Really? I was pretty let down by this. It just feels a little too unnecessary.
[sp]The whole movie turned into a trolley problem really quick, I feel trolled.[/sp] I did really like it, though.
I guess I liked it because I had zero expectations? I felt like it was a fun watch that did some cool stuff. Nothing groundbreaking but I got what I wanted out of it.
I liked it. The original Cloverfield is my favorite movie, and while this one doesn't do much new or even interesting, I still enjoyed it. A lot of people seem to have this weird view that this was going to be high-brow cinema though, and are justifiably upset. I'm not really sure where they got that notion from a series like Cloverfield
If I can criticize anything it's that I kinda wish they doubled down on the alternate reality stuff. I loved what they did do, even if it did raise more questions than answer.
it was fucking trash i'm genuinely appalled that some of you are saying it was good. it felt like a cookie-cutter netflix "original" sci-fi film that was so unoriginal that at one point i was going mad wondering if it was some sort of meta thing where the whole premise was that it was unoriginal [sp]because the station was replacing a near-identical version of itself, or something[/sp] but then i realised that no, it was just trash and unoriginal. like i genuinely felt like i'd seen the exact same stupid shit a billion times before it was like someone who had never seen any films except sunshine and had no idea how gravity works decided to write a film, had access to a hilariously generic space-station set, and had enough dirt on enough decent actors to blackmail them into performing their shitty story for them shoutout to Aksel Hennie for being typecast as The German Astronaut though, there are worse things to be typecast as
[QUOTE=evlbzltyr;53109151] shoutout to Aksel Hennie for being typecast as The German Astronaut though, there are worse things to be typecast as[/QUOTE] He was actually Russian tho [editline]5th February 2018[/editline] With Daniel Bruhl it would have been too much to handle
Jesus, that was generic. It felt like a mediocre hodgepodge of every sci-fi movie released in the last 2 decades. Also all the Cloververse stuff was painfully edited in in Post.
I wasn’t expecting it to be high-brow cinema but it felt really generic compared to other “stuck on an isolated station” sci-fi/horror stories like Alien, The Thing, Sunshine, Moon, etc. And the way they connected it to Cloverfield was really contrived. [sp]They inserted this story about an energy crisis and international tension around a film that was just a simple monster movie. It almost felt like a retcon. I’d rather they have just kept it as an anthology series like 10 Cloverfield Lane did.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Swiket;53109187]I wasn’t expecting it to be high-brow cinema but it felt really generic compared to other “stuck on an isolated station” sci-fi/horror stories like Alien, The Thing, Sunshine, Moon, etc. And the way they connected it to Cloverfield was really contrived. [sp]They inserted this story about an energy crisis and international tension around a film that was just a simple monster movie. It almost felt like a retcon. I’d rather they have just kept it as an anthology series like 10 Cloverfield Lane did.[/sp][/QUOTE] I literally wrote to a friend "this seems like a mediocre Sunshine" about 30 minutes into the movie. I feel like they stole sequences practically whole-cloth from other movies. How did the alternate universe one armed guy know that the gyroscope was inside the Russian dude? Why did the Russian dude go insane and hear voices from worms in his head? No wonder Paramount dumped this shit. Even after editing in all the Cloverfield stuff it doesn't stand out. Shame. I had all of the Cloverfield lore practically memorized from the first ARG.
I love the part where [sp]a whole bunch of wacky shit happens for absolutely no reason[/sp]
It was a big dumb scifi thriller kinda thing. I liked it. It's not perfect, it's a little generic, but it was enjoyable. Pretty much all there is to say about it.
[QUOTE=SAULSBASHWALL;53109198]I love the part where [sp]a whole bunch of wacky shit happens for absolutely no reason[/sp][/QUOTE] I mean, they did kind of explain it. It's just very inconsistent.
[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;53109207]I mean, they did kind of explain it. It's just very inconsistent.[/QUOTE] Yes, the particle accelerator wrote a blank check for the script to do whatever the fuck it wanted, but I don't think that makes for good writing.
i really liked it but [sp]felt dumb that the movie went "ok we will kill this girl now. fuck it why not"[/sp]
movie was bad kinda confounded by how many of you like it im expecting a 20% rotten tomatoes score when reviews turn up tomorrow
There was at least one connection to 10 Cloverfield Lane: the conspiracy nut in the beginning was named Mark Stambler. [sp]His brother Howard had that nice bunker.[/sp] [editline]5th February 2018[/editline] Speaking of which, that bit was a little too on the nose. [sp]"Oh yeah, sure, it could solve the energy crisis but it could also RIP HOLES IN OUR DIMENSION AND BRING ALIENS AND DEMONS THROUGH. please buy my book."[/sp]
It was an okay movie. I enjoyed watching it as a dumb scifi flick but it felt like a rip off of alien, event horizon, or any other space station scifi. Cloverfield is one of my favorite movies ever, and I thought Cloverfield Lane was fantastic up until the she gets out of the bunker. This one just felt generic.
[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;53109267]There was at least one connection to 10 Cloverfield Lane: the conspiracy nut in the beginning was named Mark Stambler. [sp]His brother Howard had that nice bunker.[/sp] [editline]5th February 2018[/editline] Speaking of which, that bit was a little too on the nose. [sp]"Oh yeah, sure, it could solve the energy crisis but it could also RIP HOLES IN OUR DIMENSION AND BRING ALIENS AND DEMONS THROUGH. please buy my book."[/sp][/QUOTE] That was probably the most blatant thing they added in post, honestly. It's literally just playing in the background with an occasional shot of it. No character reacts in specific to anything he's saying outside of "turn that shit off".
[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;53109267] [sp]"Oh yeah, sure, it could solve the energy crisis but it could also RIP HOLES IN OUR DIMENSION AND BRING ALIENS AND DEMONS THROUGH. please buy my book."[/sp][/QUOTE] Did someone say [sp]ALIENS AND MONSTERS[/sp]?
[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;53109267][sp]"Oh yeah, sure, it could solve the energy crisis but it could also RIP HOLES IN OUR DIMENSION AND BRING ALIENS AND DEMONS THROUGH. please buy my book."[/sp][/QUOTE] I like the movie, but god, this fucking part.
Got a free Netflix trial to watch it, and I enjoyed it. Is it a great movie, no, but for what it is, I liked it. My least favorite of the Cloverfield movies, but not a bad movie in my opinion, much better than the last space station horror movie I saw, Life, from last year. Besides the [sp] guy on the newscast talking about dimensions merging and causing aliens, demons, and straight up saying sea monsters, [/sp] I thought it did a good job of adapting another film into the Cloverfield world, and in this case actually making an attempt to connect it to the first. Call it lazy or bad writing, but [sp] everything in the universe going wonky really helps it work in my opinion, as its not so much a retcon of the first, you can see it as quite literally merging the two worlds, where Cloverfield happens, and this energy crisis version of earth. [/sp] Overall, I'd watch it again sure, and fuck me if [sp] seeing the monster finally used again didn't make me happy, even if its like 10 seconds from the shoulders up. [/sp]
That ending shot also proves that theory the OG Cloverfield monster was a baby. That boy had to be a few miles tall.
First half, very good. Second half, very bad.
I don't get why people had a problem with [sp]Donal Logue's cameo as crazy man preaching about end of the world along with book shilling, since that's sort of what happens whenever something massively "world ending" happens IRL. Happened with Y2K, happened with the 2012 Mayan calendar bullshit.[/sp] Some parts of the movie are stereotypical bullshit, with [sp]the crew getting killed off one by one in ways that are simply explained away as "Multiverse~"[/sp], others are just a very big question mark since it never went anywhere, such as [sp]the worm farm appearing inside Volkov, which raises the question of why weren't any of the other crew members affected besides Mundy[/sp], or [sp]Mundy's arm just sort of chilling in a box for the entire movie.[/sp] The setting and the situation is cool, but that's all they are, the setting and the situation. You can put these characters and plotline anywhere else other than a space station and you'd still have the same movie. [sp]The kills, besides Kiel's, were sort of creative I guess? But again they're mostly the result of "Multiverse~" doing weird things.[/sp] Anyways, overall I found it just eh. Feasible. Okay. Watchable. There was a generous amount of dutch angles which I appreciated because it just gave it that authentic campy feel, and the sound design was good. This movie had the same problem as Bright, in that it didn't go far enough. Some cool things are introduced, but none of them are really expanded upon. Is it due to reshoots to make it fit more into the Cloverfield universe? Is it leftover from the original script? 7/10 Just some extra thoughts: [sp]I thought all the scenes with Michael on the ground were pretty bad. They served no purpose besides letting you know the events were happening parallel to the first Cloverfield movie, plus the technology difference from the first Cloverfield and Paradox with all the sci-fi tech would have at least enabled some sort of information about a giant monster attacking New York City to have spread on the internet through smartphones and social media, no?[/sp] [sp]I thought the news report of the remnants of the alternate universe Cloverfield Station was a decent nod to the original movie's ending clip with the debris falling from space and into the Atlantic Ocean, although I don't know how it would work if Cloverfield Station debris WAS that object, since it seems like they almost intentionally want to make that connection. Does that mean alternate Earth is also going to get attacked by Clover in some near future?[/sp] This just makes me want to rewatch 10 Cloverfield Lane.
[QUOTE=Swiket;53109071]To be honest, it felt like a trashy Syfy original film that [B]had some additional scenes shot to fit into Cloverfield.[/B] Predictable story with uninteresting characters and some hokey dialogue.[/QUOTE] That's literally what they did, so...
[QUOTE=Zeos;53108889]This... movie has such a high quality it's it's so bizarre.[/QUOTE] Was supposed to be a theatrical release. Solid. Not amazing or DUNDUNDUN, just solid, which is why you're watching it on Netflix and not in a theater. [sp] The deaths aside from Volkov were pure by the numbers contrivance, and the alternate Gyro ending up in Volkov was also pure contrivance considering where he actually was when it fired. Still one thing this series does well is they got all right actors in all the right spots, cause boy do they do some carrying for some JUST CAUSE SPESS BOOGA BOOGA contrivance, and some "the other Urf is da Debils Ben Franklin Medulla Oblongat-taaah" ""plot twists" that aren't terribly non-telegraphed. Although it's pretty clever how it turns out to be a sequel and a prequel, and most of the God Particle elements stay relatively intact, including people being both the fix and fuckup.[/sp] Much like Bright there's some stuff there you can't help but roll yours eye at, but there's enough good stuff to retain the plot and keep the movie itself going. Pretty Ok and will probably draw heavy buy in due to the way it was marketed.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.