Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Cloverfield sucked

We saw a sneak preview of that new J.J. Abrams movie. You know, the one that had the preview before Tranformers, where even after you watched it, you had no idea what the movie was going to be about. So yeah, it wasn't very good.

Spoilers ahead.

The thing that's destroying New York City is this giant, alien, sea-monster-looking, spider thing that runs around killing people and busting down buildings and birthing 3-foot spider creatures that run around and kill people. And if they bite you, your head explodes. Kind of a cross between Godzilla, Arachnaphobia, and the Blair Witch Project.

The good things about it were that it was pretty action-packed and suspenseful. That's about it.

The bad things were that it was virtually unwatchable because of the home video camera approach they took. Brian actually had to leave the theater for about 20 minutes so that he wouldn't throw up. Thank goodness it was barely an hour and a half long. Other bad stuff about it was the story, the acting, and the dialogue. I hated the characters, and quite honestly thought they deserved to get eaten by the monster. Total dumbasses.

Oh, and it pretty much had the same ending as the Blair Witch Project. How else would a movie shot like a home movie end? With the dumbass who can't put down the camera long enough to run away getting killed, duh.

So there you go. Cat's out of the bag and I saved you $10. Final grade: D+

8 comments:

d said...

Hmm.

Something to chew on.

Pun horrifically intended.

yournamehere said...

I owe you ten dollars now. The next time I'm in Vegas, half a drink is on me.

chuck said...

Cloverfield was one of the worst movies I have ever seen. The movie was shot in the unorignal blair witch style and was too often out of focus, dark and fast panning where you couldn't enjoy the movie instead you focused on how annoying it was. The actors were horrible typical of a B movie - I guess they hired the cheapest actors they could find.

I haven't seen people get up and walk out of a theater in a long time, yet people were getting up and leaving.
Reeves, is a horrible director and JJ is an idiot for letting him direct it.

If they had done this film in more of a mixure style it would have been better. But then you still have the problem where there's just not enough time with the monster, characters are not developed, and no explanations of a lot of scenes. The Movie sucked not only because of the way it was shot, but becuase the script was plain bad.

I saw JJ in an interview where he claims this is America's answer to Godzilla - Eeeh - not a chance! JJ's monster will simply be filed away as another low budget POS monster film with really bad actors.

I'll never waste a dime on anything that has to do with JJ again.

Lots of hype - but Cloverfield does not deliver -!!!

cd
Miami, FL
vb6wiz@yahoo.com

Anonymous said...

The movie was horrible....I am calling Kyle and Kenny to get my money back from JJ..

Anonymous said...

agreed the movie was a total let down! worst movie i've seen since "my date with drew"....horrible!

JERZYVIXEN said...

CLOVERFEILD BLEW IT WAS A WASTE OF TEN DOLLARS I COULDA USED FOR GAS IN MY CAR. I SHOULDA WENT AND SEEN ONE MISSED CALL INSTEAD

Anonymous said...

Man, this movie sucked. I saw it, and still don't know what the monster looks like. It should have been a SciFi made-for-TV movie.
The 20-something yuppies were SO stupid, and the characters were SO unable to even pretend to think how to defend themselves, and the acting SO bad, that I was bummed that they ALL didn't get killed faster so I didn't have to watch anymore jerky video.
Some evil liar put out a review in early January, and addressed the rumors that the entire movie would be told from the perspective of only one (jerkily filmed) video camera. The reviewer claimed to have seen the movie, and said "No, only SOME parts of the movie are in jerky hand-held style". LIAR!!!!!! The entire movie is shot as though it is all from the lens of ONE video camera, and MOST of the movie jerks around or even films static shots at an angle. I know, the guy behind the camera is SUPPOSED to not be any good with a camera - SO WHAT!?!?! It was still stupid and irritating. And the WORST part was the movie shows maybe a total of 20 seconds of the monster, and never all at once (except for a few split-second views from above).
Give me money back, JJ. I wasn't a fan of your TV shows, and now am not a fan of your movies, either.
This movie sucked.

Anonymous said...

This movie is just another hollywood vomit factory atempt at getting money out of the public.