Thought it was a fantastic film despite the pussiness of James, and the crappy intro.
Cloverfield was wack...
- Thread starter Gfletch19
- Start date
Thought it was a fantastic film despite the pussiness of James, and the crappy intro.
It was a pretty good film overall! Some weak/questionable moments, but as a whole the movie stuck with me.
Just watched it. Shit sucked.
Im late but fuck it.
Action was nice...BUT!
Shit was another wack New York destruction movie.
Plotless....no Climax...just mufukas running for dear life on video camera.
DUMB SHIT. Made for people who like the sensationalism, Who'll put all the bullshit in it
aside to convince themselves the shit was hot.
And, The ending wast bad because it wasnt happy, it was just wack.
Action was nice...BUT!
Shit was another wack New York destruction movie.
Plotless....no Climax...just mufukas running for dear life on video camera.
DUMB SHIT. Made for people who like the sensationalism, Who'll put all the bullshit in it
aside to convince themselves the shit was hot.
And, The ending wast bad because it wasnt happy, it was just wack.
Last edited:
Re: Cloverfield
i disagree. i thought cloverfield was above average, and i thought the host was only average.
i disagree. i thought cloverfield was above average, and i thought the host was only average.
Yes the city was nuked...but who knows what happen after that. The sequel will be shot from another person's point of view. If you can remember the bridge scene the guy recording films another man recording the chaos too.
the only complaint i had was about the sequence in the subway tunnel.
they're walking guided by cam light. OK.
they see the creepy crawlers by night vision. OK.
but when it came time to break out, they didn't switch back from night vision to cam light. they would've been blind running in the dark. they wouldn't have been able to fight back (like they did). and they sure as hell wouldn't have been able to find that side door to escape.
they're walking guided by cam light. OK.
they see the creepy crawlers by night vision. OK.
but when it came time to break out, they didn't switch back from night vision to cam light. they would've been blind running in the dark. they wouldn't have been able to fight back (like they did). and they sure as hell wouldn't have been able to find that side door to escape.
Well I can tell you right now the whole subway scene was B.S. because
1)Thats not how NYC subways are, in the tunnels the emergency lighting provides enough light to see to the next set of lights. so it shouldn't have been that dark wear they couldn't see the monsters in the first place.
2) That side entrance they ran into would have more than likely been locked from the inside.
The movie wasn't bad.
It was wild how that girl got sick and pretty much exploded lol.
I'd watch the sequel. SMH @ them surviving that helicopter crash.
It was wild how that girl got sick and pretty much exploded lol.
I'd watch the sequel. SMH @ them surviving that helicopter crash.
they didnt use a nuke..just a couple of MOAB bombs
There is no way to tell if they used the MOAB's in the scene right before the helicopter was knocked out of the air or right before Rob and Beth died. But there is another ending and which someone rescues them right after the explosion. So maybe it wasn't a nuclear bomb.
Re: Cloverfield
i'm tripping off how much information is available about the movie but not actually contained in the movie.
the DVD had 2 alternate endings, but truth be told neither of them were very much different than the theatrical ending.
where did you see the ending with the rescue?
i'm tripping off how much information is available about the movie but not actually contained in the movie.
the DVD had 2 alternate endings, but truth be told neither of them were very much different than the theatrical ending.
where did you see the ending with the rescue?
that ending u speak of is up on YouTube..the only thing that gets rescued is the camera
watch at 4:04
