Comments on: Cloverfield Five Minute Clip Online!

By: Grumpypants

Grumpypants — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 01:25:27 +0000

I took up whole movie theatre. I look smaller than
I am. People no live. hehe…fun. Good. Me gorgeous.
Feel sorta bad for kill. Not really. Too short. New
view. People look so small. Bigger on screen. My butt hurt.

By: juzeppe

juzeppe — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:12:06 +0000

nice preview, but there is a full video, in net

By: Jim Carey

Jim Carey — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 21:14:38 +0000

A month ago, Alcadyzaar said:

>>And please don’t tell me the whole movie is going to be shot in hand-cam…like watching 2 hours of someones bad home videos.<

Big hurdles for Cloverfield.

1. Run time is a paltry 90 minutes. This, for something I’ve been teased with for over a year.

2. Re: Hand-cam. If there’s a monster, I want quality effects, aerial shots, and high resolution, not a shaky-fuzzy-grainy-static-obstructed silhouette between buildings.

3. The reveal of the monster is so crucial, and my expectations so high. This better be spectactular.

4. The monster is such a secret–can someone “spoil” the whole experience, by blurting out that “It’s a giant turnip!” or whatever?

By: Jim Carey

Jim Carey — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 05:18:20 +0000

Anyone catch the new (?) commercial? I saw it on Conan O’Brien (the bearded one)’s show. The tag line is, “Their only hope…is each other,” and shows a new perspective of the Libertyhead hitting the street.

By: Zachary

Zachary — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:15:37 +0000

In the trailers, Rob asks Hud why the hell does he still have it on. And Hud Replys as such “We got to let them know what happen(s)(ed)” So I can see why they would leave it on. No one else is going to shoot it, I would if I was them. Cause you know the government will try to cover up as much as possible.

By: Alcadyzaar

Alcadyzaar — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:10:17 +0000

If they want to do the whole thing in the handheld, fine. I’m sure they have their reasons. My only issue, and its a small one, is that anytime I’ve known anyone to ever try to run with a handheld, they would either turn it off, or you would be getting shots of people’s feet and the floor.
No to mention, this guy then trips and falls (maybe due to the fact he’s trying to look at the hand held screen (LOL)), but the camera never misses a step and a guy helps him up, and yup, he’s still got the perfect angle on the camera.
Oy vey!

By: steve adams

steve adams — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 05:29:02 +0000

Well Jim when you typed, Wowie zowie and Mabel.
I just had to ask…..:)
^

By: Jim Carey

Jim Carey — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 04:38:59 +0000

Zachary-you got me cynically red handed, man.

Steve-no, i don’t have an unnecessary “r” in my name. haha

By: steve adams

steve adams — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 04:12:06 +0000

The compensation for the handheld look will be the Panavison steadycam and other cool effects that will take your mind off the handheld aspect to begin with.
Not all handhelds have CGI and Color filtration… Yet.
^
Btw Jim are you the actor Jim Carry? I just had to ask..?

By: Zachary

Zachary — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 03:56:57 +0000

You really have nothing good to say about this movie huh, Jim? Lol

By: Heath

Heath — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 21:31:37 +0000

I will admit I got sick laying in bed trying to watch Thirteen on a TV that was in my line of site, so I wasn’t looking up or down, but dead on. And that made me ill!

heath

By: Jim Carey

Jim Carey — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 21:18:03 +0000

It’s not only the shakiness. But that’s an issue–when the main guy spends half his time yelling “Oh God!” or “It’s alive!” or “Wowie zowie, look at that, Mabel!”

The crap about handhelds is the “center of the universe” point of view. A traditional camera pans across a room (among other things). With a personal shaky cam, the view is “trapped” and has to spin around from left to right, at close range, to see the people in a room.

Maybe on a big screen, this stuff becomes unimportant. Or Abrams will compensate somehow.

By: steve adams

steve adams — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 19:46:01 +0000

The handheld aspect I believe will be “enhanced” meaning it won’t look Blair Witchy. The shots all look clean and professional.
There’s very little shaking except when the creature walks by or there running for their lives.
Overall I think watching this film you will forget that its a handheld experience.
This handheld perspective could also work VERY effectivly to scare alot of folks out of there seats
The tension and drama will overtake the viewer….
^
But just incase bring some Excedrin
=€

By: Vic

Vic — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 17:36:39 +0000

Thoughts:

A whole movie with that handheld camera? I hope it’s not longer than 90 minutes or there will be a class action suit for migraines and nausea caused by the film.

Looks like an American version of Godzilla (but a GOOD one this time).

I do like the realism aspect of it.

Vic

By: Heath

Heath — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 15:32:50 +0000

They shot the movie, I think, on the Panavision Genesis, which they shot Superman Returns, Click and other films on. That’s high quality!

Heath

By: Jim Carey

Jim Carey — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 15:21:40 +0000

I’m looking forward to Cloverfield, but if it’s all “home movie” I’ll be reaching for the Dramamine.

By: Heath

Heath — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 13:55:39 +0000

Interview with Matt Reeves:

http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3945&Itemid=99

Even the trailer and clip say that Cloverfield is a designation/code name for what happened. Ie, The Manhattan Project, etc.

Heath

By: steve adams

steve adams — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 07:33:32 +0000

The military base is underground.

By: steve adams

steve adams — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 07:31:49 +0000

Well, well see on that rumor…..

By: steve adams

steve adams — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 07:27:56 +0000

Yeah they have found a way to integrate live action and handheld motion into a first person visual experience that is grounded in a way you don’t have any lag time. Its gonna be the next big thing in films I’m telling ya.
^
Not that I fully think this fad should be burned out but it could be and it starts here.
^