My assumption was that the satellite crashed and released the monster from beneath the water...

either way, entertaining movie, but I can see why it wasn't a movie for everyone....

Horrible fucking movie. End of story. Not really sure how anyone could enjoy it. 'cam' innovation sucked and started off pretty annoying. No real storyline/plot (no, this is not a cool/unique/interesting feature, this is stupid). Horrible acting. List could probably go on but it's annoying to even think about this movie or what was in it any longer.

Exactly. You kind of have to get your head around the fact that this is "real", and what you are watching is the US military's only record of what happened. The home movie motif is actually what makes the whole thing work, but anyone who was expecting the usual "blockbuster monster movie" with blockbuster movie cinematography is definitely going to be disappointed and come away hating it.

As previously stated I've watched it twice, but am really not motivated to see it a third time, at least anytime soon. However, it did leave me wondering if there could be any kind of sequel, maybe one that is more regular movie and not from the perspective of the home vidcam. It's just that there's a tiny infinitesimal part of me that would like to know what happened next. Or was it supposed to be assumed that the monster was killed at the end there?

I thoroughly enjoyed... best made movie I've seen in quite some time, whether or not that is saying much.

Original, different, and just corny enough to be laughable at times...

hahahahahahah, u made me spray coffee all over my macbook :1orglaugh

It was good.

The monster wasn't from space. It was some new species thingy that hatched from an egg underseas and made its way to the surface to wreak havoc, like a confused little child. Just lashing out at everything in sight. Frantic. Panicked. Although those lovely plot elements were completely left out of the movie and shoved away in the special features on the DVD.

Stupid.

It was alright, entertaining but yeah there wasn't much of a story to it which is something I enjoy when watching a movie.

i didn't appreciate it. after the movie, my head is spinning and almost puked.

Nope... :winkwink:




*geek alert*

fiddy monsters

"clearly says it's still alive"

Sounds like sequel fodder to me.

yea, i saw it 3 times since, thought it was a great movie

I watched it for the first time the other day myself. Its not a bad movie, but I felt like they spent a little to much time in the party. Should have shown some other families or something.

The only other tidbit about this movie that puzzled me is... how did they arrive at the name "Cloverfield"? I mean, nothing in or about the movie suggests anything about the name they gave it, so I did a quick search about it.

This is what I found...

Also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloverfield


And it looks like there will be a sequel coming... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloverfield#Sequel

Poor acting, poor storyline, poor dialogue and the hand held camera shit just pissed me off...

how do you guys know it was a satellite that hit the water...from my perspective it was the monster/alien...it came hurtling into earth from outerspace

I thought it was a very interesting idea and well done for what they were going for. I think the camera technique used helped suck viewers in and helped them identify with the people in the movie. Obviously this movie is not for everyone but I don't think it deserves being compared to Blair Witch because this movie offered so much more in my opinion.

The director actually cleared that one up himself. Satellite...

ea theres no way a battery can last that long.... I stikll dont think ill waste my time to go see it

I watched the movie and thought it was ok but it sure left a LOT of room for more.

I didn't like the camera work at first but as I noticed how each scene was shot and edited I thought it was done really well even though the overall effect is hard to watch.

As for the battery lasting, why is everyone assuming that the camera ran non stop for the whole event. Everytime you see a different setting in the movie the guy with the camera could have stopped and then started to tape again. Just because the event took all night doesn't mean the guy had the camera on all night

The thing I find funny is the cell phone battery dies and he has to run into the electronics store to loot a battery (notice it didn't need to be charged either), but no one mentions grabbing camera batteries.

I saw both movie and DVD. The movie was awful, most of the people in the theatre got sick. People were running out, and a lot of guys in the bathrooms were regretting watching. The DVD is easy to watch. Plus you can actually stop the DVD to find clues and go back to see if you missed something (such as, are there two monsters? and notice, there isn't one calendar in the entire movie, nothing tells you what year this takes place).

There are codes in the opening that help explain some things. If you're curious, and still haven't seen it. Go to cloverfieldclues and then rent the dvd. The movie is just a piece in a much larger and more entertaining puzzle.

Great post.

And now that you mention it I did wonder about the batteries the guy stole for his phone. Every new phone battery I've ever bought had to first be charged before it could be used. He must have grabbed the magic ones I guess.

thats really funny, I just watched it for the first time this last sunday, I enjoyed it.

I sure hope the sequel's better...

That movie sucks!!