 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.137.224.92
In Reply to: RE: "Cloverdale?" Really poor film but surprisingly good Fx. posted by tinear on January 26, 2008 at 15:05:12
Were you looking for Chip & Dale, or a documentary of David Coverdale? ;0)Just teasing, but I'm a little surprised and curious about your extreme dislike for this film.
>>> "This movie has zero suspense." <<<
No offense, but I have to disagree strongly with that impression. Maybe you didn't like the characters and therefor didn't care what happened to them, but to suggest that there was no suspense is just wrong; I don't know how I can be more emphatic about it.
>>> "Things shake, people die. Always." <<<
Are you upset because folks apparently die in a film about a gargantuan beast destroying a city? (shrug)
>>> "Yes, the camera shakes but it's the shaky story and direction that sink it." <<<
Sorry tin, but the story is a refreshing re-envisioning of the monster genre which works quite well and no amount of bellyaching is going to alter that. Not only is this view shared by most of the nation's leading film critics, but the public concurs. Besides, the story isn't at all shaky when one considers the rationale for documenting events.
IMHO, the Director captured everything he should've caught during the panicked evacuation. BTW, the film didn't "tank", in fact it reached 1st place ($40 mil. plus for the first weekend) at the Box Office, so I'm not sure what you saw sinking, but it wasn't Cloverfield!
>>> "Absolutely no reason to see this film." <<<
From a very narrow, highly subjective perspective perhaps, but once again, I'm forced to strongly disagree. The only caveat I would place on this movie is that those who are overly sensitive to motion sickness might want to sit further back because the constant hand held camera movement can be disorienting.
The bottom line: Cloverfield was a brilliant film for it's genre and broke new ground even though it does owe BWP for some influence. Note: We may have to just agree to disagree on this one, but it's a shame that you feel the need to discredit this film so vigorously when a great many folks are finding this a totally worthwhile experience.
Respectfully,
AuPh
Edits: 01/26/08 01/26/08Follow Ups:
all mixed together with the power out at night. Woooooooooh.
Grow up!
.
Complicit Constapo Talibangelical since MMIII
;0)
.
Complicit Constapo Talibangelical since MMIII
should make one care about them, i.e. Blair Witch kids. A bunch of vain party kids with zero attempt to personalize them... I wanted them to die, miserably :-).
The camera: in Blair, there was a reason to document everything. In this? None, except to make a film.
Major problem: the girls all cried, hysterically, but the guys all were (in comparison) brave and composed. Right.
After being attacked in the tunnel, the guy in the lead marches around with no weapon. Guess he read ahead and knew he wouldn't be attacked for several more scenes?
Super chicks: in police films, we're used to cops taking massive hits and keepin' on tickin' but this isn't that genre. A girl has a long piece of REBAR penetrate from her back through her shoulder and then has it pulled out... and she puts a jacket on and carries on, even running? How about the one that gets gnawed on like a taco and also just keeps right on goin?'
And... what's with the exploding bit? Did it slip an IED into her?
Films are good because they create a believable film world unto themselves: this one didn't. The big creature seemed to be reptilian or amphibian whereas the small ones obviously were arachnid. Try and explain that...
Lastly, all the girls and boys pretty much visually were interchangeable, except for length of hair.
As I said, the FX were good, the most believable I've seen though the marauding big creature was a bit silly: at his pace, he would have laid waste to Manhattan in an hour or two.
> > > "After being attacked in the tunnel, the guy in the lead marches around with no weapon. Guess he read ahead and knew he wouldn't be attacked for several more scenes?" < < <
It's called shock.
> > > "Super chicks: in police films, we're used to cops taking massive hits and keepin' on tickin' but this isn't that genre. A girl has a long piece of REBAR penetrate from her back through her shoulder and then has it pulled out... and she puts a jacket on and carries on, even running? How about the one that gets gnawed on like a taco and also just keeps right on goin?'"
Again, shock. She wasn't a "super chick" by any means, but folks in real life who have been impaled have somehow survived to walk or run around for a time pumped up on adrenaline. While it does look implausible, it only stretches credulity in the truth is stranger than fiction category.
> > > "And... what's with the exploding bit? Did it slip an IED into her?" < < <
Her blood was infected with a some kind of unfamiliar fast acting parasite or disease that acted similar to a hyped up version of ebola; did you not notice the medical team suited up in enviro-hazard gear?
> > > "Films are good because they create a believable film world unto themselves: this one didn't." < < <
While I agree with the first part of that statement, I just happen to adamantly disagree with your conclusions in regard to this film.
> > > "The big creature seemed to be reptilian or amphibian whereas the small ones obviously were arachnid." < < <
Not at all that obvious (maybe you should go back and catch the film again or wait for the DVD). These creatures were all reptilian, or rather amphibian, but not familiar; these were very alien looking creatures. While the mass shedding of small offspring seems to lend itself toward arachnid behavior this has it's roots in natural science; various species, including some fish hold their offspring close and release them when they mature or as advantageous to their survival.
> > > "Lastly, all the girls and boys pretty much visually were interchangeable, except for length of hair." < < <
They were people, as opposed to stereotypes; maybe you prefer more overt designations, but it was interesting to observe how each of these folks reacted in the heat of a crisis.
> > > "As I said, the FX were good..." < < <
I agree, but if that's all you got out of this film, then that's faint praise.
Respectfully (a differing viewpoint),
AuPh
I had a holiday job in a confectionary factory when I was in high school. One of my jobs was to staple up the shipping cartons, cartons that held a bulk amount of packaged confectionary. The staples were those big brass staples you see in the cartons a lot of audio/HT gear comes in.
One day my right index finger got in the way and I put a staple all the way through it. It went in through the nail and came out the other side, luckily missing the bone. I remember looking at my finger with some interest at the time and then walking out to the boss' office to say that I had a problem. No screams or anything, no pain. I just looked and then walked and spoke to the boss as if we were having a casual chat. While my finger certainly wasn't worrying me, I remember thinking it seemed to worry him a little excessively at the time.
I was taken to the local hospital's emergency unit, 3 or 4 blocks down the road where they looked at me and told me to wait. 45 minutes later, with no treatment, they decided to deal with me. I was still having no pain. They gave me an injection of local anaesthetic into the finger but put it in too close to the base of the finger to numb the tip. Things started to hurt at that stage so they then gave me a second injection closer to the tip, waited for that to take effect, then removed the staple. I think if they had seen me immediately and not let me wait for 45 minutes, they could have removed the staple without anaesthetic. I also wonder whether one effect of the anaesthetic was to reduce the amount of 'protection' I was getting from shock and, paradoxically, trigger the return of pain given that they put the first injection in too far away to actually numb the finger tip where the staple was.
A staple isn't a piece of structural steel and a finger isn't a shoulder, but shock is surprisingly effective at shutting out pain and letting you function reasonably well. It's a protective mechanism so that shouldn't be surprising. If the best thing the brain can do to get you out of a situation alive is to kill pain while leaving you on your feet and moving, it can certainly do so. You do feel a little disconnected from what's going on, as I certainly did, but that's probably a plus as well.
I suspect this particular incident in Cloverfield was a bit extreme as an example but I think it is certainly within the realm of possibility. Provided there was no significant blood loss, and there may not have been while the steel was embedded so the only real blood loss would come when the person was lifted off the steel spike and that was dealt with on screen, then I think the person could keep functioning for quite a while but they would come to a stop hard when there was a pressure let off. I think that would have occurred when they reached the evac site and I think the girl would probably have crashed out on getting into the helicopter. I think her level of functioning after the helicopter crash is much less plausible than her level of functioning between her rescue and their arrival at the evac site.
David Aiken
Were the kids wearing radio becons? The monster caught up with them on a regular basis! (Out of all of Manhattan's population.)
.
Complicit Constapo Talibangelical since MMIII
Maybe there were more then one monster. On the begining screen, it said multiple sitings
seemed to like that steaming pile of horsepoop, Blair Witch. Especially considering it was more marketing gimmick than movie (which is the strongest thing the two films have in common).
"You can safely assume you have created God in your own image when he hates all the same people you do."
innovative and not gimmicky: it wasn't a planned marketing approach but rather generated by genuine enthusiasm.
Have you camped much (I know you do)?
It was believably terrifying, with the kids doing believable things as the horror increased. Unlike most commercial American horror films, Blair relied on clever plot twists which incrementally ratcheted up the fear factor. The actors were believable kids, stoners/slacker video guys.
I'd say it's up there with "Night of the Living Dead," though it may be better because it didn't depend on ANY gore or sensationalism: you only heard and imagined the scary stuff.
A camera, some twigs, and intelligence: I can see why Hollywood types hate Blair Witch. With gazillion dollar FX budgets, mega productions, and casts filled with TV personality-types, they can't compete.
.
Complicit Constapo Talibangelical since MMIII
I am not sure what an "entertainment fraud" is, but if the audience is entertained, well, then, it is hardly entertainment fraud. Entertainment seems to be in the eye of the beholder, and since BWP did a lot of word of mouth business, more often than not coming from the people who had seen it, I suspect they did not feel they were frauded.
I'd say that the makers were something of a one hit wonder, but, let's face it, their one hit was rather commercially brilliant. BWP certainly is not the first in which the marketing, both planned and unplanned, generate success.
As for the film itself, I thought it a brilliant idea wrapped around a mildly interesting plot. It took a pedestrian plot - kids in the forest which disappear one by one, making the camera one of the characters, rather than simply a passive observer. I do not think the concept had legs, after all, how many other films tried the same thing, but, then, the horror genre has been pretty much recycling itself, since, well, probably the first horror film. I think if you get around the hype, you can enjoy the film for what it is, and on its own terms.
;^D
Seriously, from start to finish it looked like a college film project to me. Yes, it was innovative and somewhat influential, and for that Blair Witch should be credited, but overall it was a rather boring film that didn't hold my interest through suspending disbelief; OTOH, Cloverfield was 180 degrees it's opposite in that respect.
Cheers,
AuPh
featured Fx of the act.
...but doesn't a live action 'pope' have to be part of the on-camera smear and cover-up to achieve classic XXX status? ;0)Seriously, in my not-so-humble opinion Cloverfield was a thousand times more accomplished & entertaining than the ludicrous student film known as The Blair Witch Project. In fact, BWP should've been retitled "How I Spent My Summer Film Internship" or "Camping Out With Scary Friends"!
Granted, Blair Witch was innovative (pointing the way for better budgeted, more sophisticated films like Cloverfield), but BW succeeded in spite of its obvious limitations (cheesy acting and dialog, and an abysmally cheap, unfinished appearance); facts which shouldn't be ignored retrospectively. IOW, I'm of the opinion that The Blair Witch Project was a fluke.
As I believe I've stated on several occasions, special effects which serve a well constructed plot shouldn't be a distraction unless the CGI draws too much attention to itself (I think that the pope and a couple of nuns might actually do that, but if so, we're talking about a live action plot! -grin).
The bottom line: properly incorporated FX should increase the realism of live action footage and enhance the suspension of disbelief. For me, Cloverfield accomplished this 100%.
Cheers,
AuPhPS: No offense tin, but you should try to get past the personal effect that this film is having on you before your blood boils and an explosion ensues! (~;^D)
PPS: You really should come to grips with the fact that we just see this film differently. :O)
this case, a stinking, putrid example of one only appreciated by brain-dead, alien creatures! ":-O)
With a 76% fresh rating from critics across the board at Rotten Tomatoes and $64 million Box Office at the start of it's second week I think you're advocating the minority viewpoint, tin. BTW, don't you think it's about time for you to scrape those "Ron Paul for President" and "I've Been To Area 51" stickers off of your bumper? ;^>
Cheers,
AuPh
Um, most those word of mouthers were hired by the studio. It was one of the most succesful, if not THE most successful planned marketing approach to a film release.
The phenomenon of BW was the unique and successful marketing... through to the point where, obviously, some people still don't know about it.
I saw the movie at home long after the phenomenon was over... and knowing that said phenomenon was mostly marketing may well have colored my viewing experience but neither I nor my girlfriend at the time (who both loved being scared by a good spooky movie) had a single genuine fright.
"You can safely assume you have created God in your own image when he hates all the same people you do."
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
