I recently watched Cloverfield on DVD. I don’t know why it’s so much fun to watch a large horrible beastie destroy New York City. But it is … and the shaky-cam technique that was used to film the movie was very effective - it worked much better in this film than in that Blair Witch flick. Just my opinion.
I kind of wish I had seen this one in the theater. It would have been even better on the big screen - though I read the camera-work made some people feel nauseous.
Today, somewhere (can’t remember where) I saw something about the possibility of a sequel …
Note: Here is where I saw the discussion of a sequel come up.
1Dan on Jun 6, 2008 at 5:13 am:
Hey, I just rented Cloverfield off iTunes not two days ago. I too thought it was better than what I expected. It works for what it is. Though I thought it was a little unrealistic that his girlfriend (can’t remember her name) could walk/run around after having a rebar smashed through a lung!
2danithew on Jun 8, 2008 at 9:31 am:
Dan, that is an excellent point … and if cinematrographers wanted more realistic monster movies, they ought to seriously consider consulting with us more often.
Sheesh.
3TStevens on Jun 11, 2008 at 12:01 pm:
Just arrived on Netflix yesterday. I hope it is as good as I hear, except for that rebar/lung thing.
4TStevens on Jun 12, 2008 at 2:30 pm:
We watched it last night and it was pretty good. I liked that they did not wuss out with the ending. Small question for those of you in the know - I assume that was the head of the statue of Liberty that landed near them, and if it was, I always thought it was much larger than that. My only NYC experiences are limited to flying in or out of JFK, so can anyone tell me if that was to scale?
Also, I was able to watch this just fine on my tv, but if I saw this on the big screen I would have needed to leave to puke. I get motion sick to the extreme (using a magnifying glass can put me over the edge) and that shaky camera would have done me in.
5danithew on Jun 17, 2008 at 6:41 am:
TStevens,
I agree that the Statue of Liberty head was not large enough. I had the same thought while watching the movie. I wonder though - maybe they researched it and it’s correct? Perhaps the impression of greater size isn’t accurate . but I wouldn’t expect the Statue of Liberty head to just slide down a street between buildings. I’d expect it to hit the buildings (on both sides of the street) as well.