1/18/08 Cloverfield

[jvmacross]

Anyone watch the latest movie in the Cloverfield franchise?  Critics seem to be hating on it...but 61% "audience" score....

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_cloverfield_paradox

Paying for Netflix anyway, so I may as well watch it when I get the chance....saw some animated Godzilla thing on Netfix too...looked OK

[TangledThorns]

I wanted to watch it before I left for work today but schools were closed so it was Cars 3 all day, again.

I still hadn't seen 10 Cloverfield Lane though. From what I read none of these sequels are real sequels anyways.

 

[505thAirborne]

I watched Cloverfield Paradox last night, it's not bad but not that good either. Visuals are great, Bear McCreary did the music so were good there. Story wise & dialogue are so-so. Not trying to spoil it but I'll say that the ending was pretty damn cool IMO. There's some hinting in this story that the crew of this space station cross dimensions from our Earth to the one we see in the first Cloverfield... but it's a sloppy attempt. 

I saw the Animated Godzilla series too, same as above (Not great, not terrible either). Artwork & detail are high end. Yet whether that's the lore or not of Godzilla, at some point you get tired of the Giant Creature that just can't be stopped no matter what. This series so far (1st episode) reinforces the idea of that is you had the SDF-1 and fired its cannons it would only stun Godzilla and he'd be up and moving again. (Just my opinion)

However the way the story is set up, it's a change of pace from previous movies always set on modern day Earth, I give it points for that. 

[Sandman]

Is this what the omega particle or god particle project was or is that something else? I so I didn't realize it was going to be a Netflix thing. Seems like kind of a downgrade to me. Though none of the cloverfield movies were great IMO.

[ArchieNov]

I thought the Cloverfiled Paradox movie wasn’t good at all. And I’m a big fan of both the first movie and Overfiled Lane. I wish they cast a Chinese person that could speak English. It’s offputting when everyone else in the movie speaks English and yet Zhang Ziyi only speaks in Mandarin, although everyone seems to be fluent in Mandarin too because they have no issues talking back to her (but in English, not Mandarin). It makes me feel like they gave up having her try to speak English while filming (I’m guessing she wasn’t good at it). 

[Tking22]

1 hour ago, Sandman said:

Is this what the omega particle or god particle project was or is that something else? I so I didn't realize it was going to be a Netflix thing. Seems like kind of a downgrade to me. Though none of the cloverfield movies were great IMO.

This was indeed formerly God Particle, now Cloverfield 3/The Cloverfield Paradox. Nobody knew it would be a Netflix thing either, it was supposed to release on April 20th in theaters via Paramount, but there was a surprise trailer and reveal during the Sueprbowl that Netflix bought the distribution rights and was surprise releasing the movie right after the game.

I watched it and kind of enjoyed it, pretty damn clear they re-shot a ton of stuff to make it fit a little more into the Clover mythos, I'm confident everything happening on "Earth" with Hamilton's husband wasn't initially shot, that was all unnecessary nonsense they packed in to try make a little more connective tissue between the films, and it was for the worst in my opinion. Just stay on the Shepard, we all saw Cloverfield, we get it, big monster in New York. All the husband's stuff was just sooooo pointless. Oh look, the Clover monster, oh look the shelter from the second film. Like I said, I am positive none of that was initially in the film and it was all re-shot then added later, I'm pretty sure the only real connection to anything Cloverfield was the name of the station, and the explanation for the other film's monsters, but not feeling confident with the film they added all the husband's scenes. I can see why Paramount let Netflix have this one, like with the American Death Note film and Bright, it was apparent these films would have been released in theaters dead on arrival, but just buying up literal scraps isn't really something Netflix should be doing, pushing for more original films should be their focus. I hated the ending, I get they were trying to get people to go "OH crap", but I didn't and it was stupid. We knew Clover in the initial movie was a baby so the parents would be insanely, stupidly massive, but the way that scene happened, right after mission control cheered and hollered that the Shepard re-appeared, was blatantly dumb. Why not mention the monsters that stand above clouds before they headed back? Once again, very, very clear that little ending scene was added to try and bank a little more on the initial film, I highly doubt that was the original ending.

I loved the first and second film, both very different, but I loved them both for different reasons. This one? Not so much. The trailer literally highlights that it will explain the first film, which was dumb because I really like the mystery of the first film, and the ARG stuff. There was a terrible, nearly unreadable mange called Cloverfield Kishin which I'm pretty sure is no longer cannon due to Paradox. Not that it mattered, once again, I liked that the first film centered around a random giant monster attack and that we didn't get an explanation as to from where and why. I feel explaining things in Paradox sort of took some of the impact out of the first film. Also, as mentioned, the explanation you get is insanely meh.

[TangledThorns]

Just watched it. The ending was so dumb it made my head hurt, literally. LITERALLY! So dumb that it tempted me to cancel my Netflix account too.

 

[Kanedas Bike]

32 minutes ago, TangledThorns said:

Just watched it. The ending was so dumb it made my head hurt, literally. LITERALLY! So dumb that it tempted me to cancel my Netflix account too.

 

Can't lie, my eyes rolled at the very end, but I can kind of appreciate the attempt. I agree with the those that feel like this probably started off as a generic "sci-fi/thriller in space" that got morphed into a Cloverfield movie.

So this was a prequel that takes place in the future.

It caused the original Cloverfield in the past. 

And somehow 10 Cloverfield lane fits into the narrative with the invading aliens having somehow been impacted by, or drawn to earth, because of the Shepard particle accelerator, presumably also in the past. 

Or something. 

-b.

[easnoddy]

5 minutes ago, Kanedas Bike said:

Can't lie, my eyes rolled at the very end, but I can kind of appreciate the attempt. I agree with the those that feel like this probably started off as a generic "sci-fi/thriller in space" that got morphed into a Cloverfield movie.

So this was a prequel that takes place in the future.

It caused the original Cloverfield in the past. 

And somehow 10 Cloverfield lane fits into the narrative with the invading aliens having somehow been impacted by, or drawn to earth, because of the Shepard particle accelerator, presumably also in the past. 

Or something. 

-b.

Alien ship-monsters.  Abrams totally LOST'ed us all again.

[TangledThorns]

Just occurred to me this film was more Event Horizon than Cloverfield plot wise. Still dumb and a waste of good acting talent.

[Kanedas Bike]

Just now, easnoddy said:

Alien ship-monsters.  Abrams totally LOST'ed us all again.

 

Yep, with at least one more movie to come. Taking place even further in the past (WWII I think).

 

Just now, TangledThorns said:

Just occurred to me this film was more Event Horizon than Cloverfield plot wise. Still dumb and a waste of good acting talent.

 

Agreed re: the acting talent! And yes, very Event Horizon-ish.

-b.

[Tking22]

Oh man, the cast is so fantastic! Such a shame. The ending shot and scene, I mean, there's literally zero chance that was filmed initially, it absolutely had to have been added after initial filming and production was over just to tie it in a bit more to the first film.

Also, the accelerator rip really doesn't help explain the Clover monster in the first film, JJ really screwed himself when he attempted to explain and flesh things out way back when Cloverfield-1/18/08 first came out. JJ explicitly stated the monster was an ancient, several thousand year old, infant, semi-aquatic sentient Earth-born species. It was in hibernation until Tagruato started mining for rare undersea algae for their Slusho drinks, all of this is real I promise, and that coupled with the falling Tagruato satellite seen at the end of the film woke the baby monster from the first film up. But then, we see the exact species of monster as the nod at the end of Paradox, clearly far, far bigger so probably not the same monster but still. 1/18/08 Cloverfield takes place on that date, Paradox, as proven by all of the stupid ARG stuff, takes place in roughly 2028-2032. Clearly each movie happens in its own universe, and clearly they are all separate worlds, but how did the Shepard overloading unleash a monster in a world in 2008 that was also released in another different world in roughly 2030 when the monster in the first film was stated by the director as being something just very ancient that was woken up, something that was always there?

The aliens in Cloverfield 2 fine, they were in the shelter when the Shepard went off, and by the time our heroine got out the effects of the Shepard overload were done, her world got an alien attack. But as far as explaining Cloverfield 1? It really didn't at all whatsoever, which is funny because the trailer for Paradox pretty clearly states it was meant to explain what attacked New York 10 years ago.

Looking on Reddit, it seems many are guessing that since it is stated that the overload effected the past, present and future, there's a chance the Clover from the first film was transported to Cloverfield 1 Earth thousands of years ago, it was dormant until it was woken up, and that the Shephard did put the monster there, just a really long time ago. I guess this kind of works considering it was mentioned past, present and future were effected. Leading to this explanation, Cloverfield 4 already wrapped up filming and will apparently release sometime in October, maybe on Netlfix again, I have no idea. The fourth film, which takes place in the 40s, apparently centers around a group of US allied troops heading to fight the Nazis, but when they get there they run into something else, presumably some kind of monsters that were put into their world by the Shephard explosion. Sounds like the old Playstation franchise Resistance Fall of Man, but whatever.

With how JJ these films are, all mystery and little substance, I think half-assedly trying to explain everything with a particle accelerator explosion was a bad idea, it feels like a cheap hand wave. I still liked all of the films, the third far less, and I will watch the fourth and more then likely the fifth, I love monster movies, but trying to explain things was a bad idea in general. I think keeping this franchise like an expensive Twilight Zone would have worked, connected in mostly name only, twists, usually centered around monsters, and your mileage will vary from film to film.