1. Our web server is getting tweaked this week and as a result some links are behaving strange. We're working on getting everything back to normal ASAP.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Alien Soup is a free community for fans of science-fiction, horror, & fantasy! Everybody is welcome here.

Horror Cloverfield (2010)

Discussion in 'Movies' started by Tom, Jan 14, 2008.

Tags:
  1. Tom

    Tom An Old Friend

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Location:
    Gulf Coast
    SEVEN DEADLY SIGNS

    FOR ‘CLOVERFIELD,’ J.J. ABRAMS CRAFTED A MASSIVE, MYSTERIOUS GUERRILLA MARKETING CAMPAIGN. BUT DOES ANY OF IT MEAN ANYTHING?


    1 It has no stars and an unknown director.

    They're somebodies to their parents, but the rest of us wouldn't recognize them if they waited on us at Indochine. Michael Stahl-David? Mike Vogel? Lizzy Caplan? Shouldn't a big monster movie be able to wrangle some stars?
    And the director is no more recognizable: Matt Reeves, a friend of Abrams who works steadily in TV but whose last feature was 1996's “The Pallbearer." Can he be trusted?
    “When J.J. and [co-producer] Bryan Burk approached me, I was blown away by the outline," Reeves said. “It seemed enormous, like wall-to-wall visual effects. But I asked, ‘Why are you thinking of me?' J.J. and Bryan said because I wasn't the obvious choice. They thought it was exciting to have someone who would bring a more naturalistic approach and a concern for character."


    2 The budget is tiny.

    Some reports put it at just $30 million, and you've got to wonder if a monster movie filled with wide-screen destruction can be made for what Britney Spears spends each month on child support.
    Reeves says he doesn't want to comment on the budget because he doesn't want audiences to think that “Cloverfield" - shot Handicam style, as though one of the characters filmed everything with his own video camera - would cheap out.
    “When people saw the initial trailer, I think they felt we were going to do what ‘Blair Witch' did, which was to never show anything," Reeves said. “In our case, we wanted to use that naturalism because it gives it a sense of dread. But what I liked about this movie was that it was enormous. There's grand-scale destruction and a monster and madness. We don't want people getting the impression that this isn't a visual-effects, thrill-ride movie. It definitely is."

    3 It's coming out now.

    As anyone who even distantly follows movies knows, January is less a season of blockbusters than a season of films you wouldn't even watch on a plane.
    “January sucks," says Chad Hartigan, box-office analyst at research firm Exhibitor Relations. “It's generally the time when studios release stuff that won't fare well with critics."
    Just look at last year, when the month gave us dreck like “Primeval" and Cedric the Entertainer's “Code Name: The Cleaner," a film that scored a 4 percent approval rating at Rotten Tomatoes.
    Reeves says the release date says nothing about the quality of the movie. “When I first got involved, one of the things from the beginning - before there was even a script - was that there was a slot in January for this movie. I guess a lot of studios have had success doing genre films over the Martin Luther King weekend. It's an unusual time for a movie like this to come out, but Paramount from the beginning felt there was tremendous potential for us here."
    “January is such a dumping ground, they're going to own this month," says Eric “Quint" Vespe, a contributing editor at Ain't It Cool News. “If they tried to compete with [summer movies], it wouldn't work as well. This is going to pay off."


    4 No one has seen it.

    The movie has yet to be shown to anyone outside a small inner circle, and no one from the press has seen it yet.
    “If you have something that really works and you know it, there's one thing you do - you screen the s--t out of it," says Jeffrey Wells, the prolific blogger behind Hollywood Elsewhere. “Draw whatever conclusions you will, but they're not screening it."
    The first advance screening will be Tuesday. Reeves says the delay is simply a matter of secrecy.
    “J.J. has a history of doing secretive projects," he says. “Back when we were doing ‘Felicity,' there was a script that leaked. It was weird. We had the script - then within an hour, there were huge plot reveals up on the Internet. That was the beginning of J.J.'s desperate need to protect. I think he felt that there is also a level at which you don't want to know everything about something before you see it. You want to be surprised."


    5 Abrams isn't directing.

    He only produced - a job that comes with a nebulous list of responsibilities. The initial idea was certainly Abrams'. While in Japan a few years back, he wandered into a toy store with his son, and after seeing all the Godzilla figures, wondered why America didn't have a monster equivalent. So he and “Lost" writer Drew Goddard created one. But how much beyond that was Abrams involved?
    “This movie has been a passion of his, but he wanted me to direct," Reeves says. “He gave me creative freedom. He was involved on each level, but wasn't there day to day. I presented my cuts to him, and he had some really great ideas."


    6 It was made too fast.

    “Cloverfield" made its journey from green light to screen in less than a year - an unbelievable turnaround for any movie, especially one with so many visual effects. Reports indicate that there wasn't even a script until well after production started, and that the cast signed on due to Abrams' name alone.
    “It moved like lightning," Reeves says. “One of the things I hoped was that the chaos of the way that we made it would inform the movie. It was this crazy, indie, garage-band approach to a tent-pole kind of movie, and that juxtaposition was very exciting for everyone."


    7 Interest is being driven by hype, not the film.

    “Cloverfield" has been the beneficiary of one of the smartest grass-roots marketing campaigns in a long time. Instead of relying on traditional ads, distributor Paramount has created a wave of hype with leaks, an army of Web sites and, above all, secrecy. Releasing that first no-title trailer, keeping the monster under wraps and dropping cryptic clues online have all fed the frenzy.
    “What Paramount has done is convinced everyone that this film belongs in the summer and is uniquely coming out in January," Hartigan says. “But really there's no one in it, the director hasn't made a movie in 12 years, and it wasn't that expensive for them. If you didn't know any better and just glanced at a schedule with some text, it would look like any other movie in January. But they've managed to change that perception.
    “And it's going to work," he adds. “If nothing else, it's guaranteed to have a big opening, then it all depends on whether the film can deliver, whether people come out of it thinking it was worth all the hype. That will be difficult."


    Now, remember that this post is BEFORE the movie was released
     
  2. n25an

    n25an Scout

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    I know what he is trying... he is trying to make a movie that's not bogged down with star power. A movie that people will see because the story is so good... It might work... J J seems to know how to make things work for him... me the left side of my brain is saying this could be cool... the right side is saying this is going to be the biggest piece of crapola.. personally I'm going with the right side...
     
  3. Tom

    Tom An Old Friend

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Location:
    Gulf Coast
    I am waiting for some reviews to make a decision on shelling out money. I'm likely going to wait till dvd till I see it.

    The one I hope he doesn't screw up is StarTrek
     
  4. n25an

    n25an Scout

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    On the Star Trek Note... I agree with you there... I really hope it works...
     
  5. Kevin

    Kevin Code Monkey Staff Abductee

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    If you like Japanese monster movies and you liked the original Blair Witch Project then you're likely to like Cloverfield.
     
  6. Tom

    Tom An Old Friend

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Location:
    Gulf Coast
    I love the Godzilla Series but I can't stand Blair Witch(Crappy movie about nothing)
     
  7. Kevin

    Kevin Code Monkey Staff Abductee

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    ... if you thought the original Blair Witch was bad, don't even bother with the sequel! I find myself watching some pretty bad movies at 3:00am on occasion.
     
  8. Tom

    Tom An Old Friend

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Location:
    Gulf Coast
    LOL, Me too Kevin, ME TOO!
     
  9. Webster

    Webster The Red Tarheel

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Location:
    Morganton, NC

    I still can't to this day believe I actually liked Blair Witch Project....... :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
     
  10. Kevin

    Kevin Code Monkey Staff Abductee

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    I think part of the problem with me was that by the time I watched it at the theaters the hype machine was already up & running and a family member had raved about how good it was.

    The wife & I sat through the whole thing and at the end we both swore that we'd never take movie recommendations from the person again. I've tried re-watching it a few times and each time I end thinking "OK, I still don't see what all of the excitement was about with this movie. :confused:"
     
  11. Black Mathias

    Black Mathias Twisted Mentat

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    Location:
    Under the Sea
    This does sure feel like another Blair Witch debacle.
     
  12. n25an

    n25an Scout

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    the test will be how JJ handles the fallout....??? if nothing else it should be fun... lol
     
  13. Webster

    Webster The Red Tarheel

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Location:
    Morganton, NC
    You know, reading skwirlinator's post at the top of the thread got me to thinking........ :eek: :eek: :eek: .........here's my two cents on Cloverfield, using those seven points he mentioned as a start............

    Point 1........By using an ensemble cast and an unknown director, it seems Abrams and company have tried to keep the film off the proverbial Hollywood radar screen as much as possible(which gives them, it would seem, more latitude but at the same time more risk should the film not do well in theatres)

    Point 2........A monster film with a small budget($30 million was the reported amount) does seem worrisome.....but, considering the extensive use of Handi-Cams', cellphone cameras, etc., it probably saved them a lot of money(which they could then use for CGI and other special effects which do cost lots of dollars)

    Point 3........I agree with skwirl on this one; it is risky releasing a film in what is essentially, for Hollywood, a near-dead period for feature films....on the other hand, if the hype towards Cloverfield is equaled by a large box-office take, then the risk might be worth it.....:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

    Point 4.........Usually, when a film has not been screened, it generally means the film is not expected to do well once it's released........on the other hand, as skwirl points out in his post, quoting Reeves,
    .........in this day and age, with the Internet and YouTube, can you really blame them for protecting a film like this with the same level of security one might see at, say, Ft. Knox?

    Point 5........I'm actually not too worried about this; if Abrams is willing to put a relative unknown in the director's chair, then more power to him if the film does well......on the flip side, though, if the film tanks, does anybody actually think Abrams will get the blame for it being the producer and not the director?

    Point 6.........It is interesting to note how fast the film went from being green-lighted to pre-production through the filming and so forth in under a year, especially considering that it is a monster film with a very large amt. of CGI and other visual effects present; throw in the fact that there wasn't a written script until production had started and that, as pointed out elsewhere, the cast had signed on primarily due to Abrams' involvement and it would look as though there wasn't a lot of focus put into the making of Cloverfield....of course, the box office receipts will tell us whether it worked or not

    Point 7........Paramount's using a very crafty, but risky strategy of viral marketing through the use of selective leaks, teaser trailers seen either before or after other films(...Transformers, unless I'm mistaken, was one of the films they attached some of those teasers' to.....) and lots of Internet hype(websites, YouTube, etc.) similar to the way Snakes on a Plane was hyped(and IIRC that movie was a disappointment once it made it to the big screen)......question is, will Cloverfield go the way of Snakes, or will it surprise us and do well once its' released in theatres?
     
  14. Tom

    Tom An Old Friend

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Location:
    Gulf Coast
    I just realized I forgot to link the original article, DOH!
     
  15. Tom

    Tom An Old Friend

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Location:
    Gulf Coast
    JUST GOT BACK - SEMI-Spoilers - As if this movie could be ruined further!!!
    This should be labeled how NOT to make a movie.
    DON"T Waste your money - VERY BAD!!!

    Monster might be an alien but its still anyones guess. You dont get a decent look at it at all
    You don't get a decent look at anything really.

    Everybody dies but you don't really see it. The cameraman gets munched but you don't really see it. The hero and his girl get stepped on or blown up but you don't really see it.

    What you do see is out of focus, shaky and headachy. The best part is when they shoot the screen at the electronics shop and the news is on.

    At the end - i guess its still alive but who knows.

    NOT RECOMMENDED
    WONT RENT
    WONT STREAM
    WONT WATCH ON TV
    I can't believe we paid to see this.
    Is it too late to get our money back?



    Oh, I know, Someone will say its so different and cutting edge.
    To them- I can do tricks and make you laugh for $9 if you want to waste your money.
     
  16. Tom

    Tom An Old Friend

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Location:
    Gulf Coast
  17. Kevin

    Kevin Code Monkey Staff Abductee

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    I've said it before and I'll say it again.... ;)

    Godzilla + The Blair Witch Project = Cloverfield
     
  18. Tom

    Tom An Old Friend

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Location:
    Gulf Coast
    I wish Godzilla was the model - at least it would have been watchable.
    Never saw BWP and still don't wanna.

    I'm serious - stay away from this mess. its bad
     
  19. Unbreakable

    Unbreakable Management

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Location:
    Australia
  20. Azhria Lilu

    Azhria Lilu Rocket Ranger

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2002
    Location:
    Derbyshire, UK
    Yeah, wasn't impressed to be honest. I found all the build up for a few minutes of monster action pretty pointless.
     

Share This Page