unforum

[rose]

[META] Cloverfield as an cultural/artistic response to 9/11

[Aurigan]

I think it might be pointless to speculate on what's going on inside Abram's head. Besides, 9/11 is still a sore subject.

NYC is always a good place for a monster movie.

[A.J.]

Doesn't NYC get enough credit for being destroyed in a lot of movies

[SHNIPE]

they did a monster movie in LA and it was boring

[Chrizzy]

With all of its buildings and people, I think New York provides the perfect claustrophobic feel.

[I'M HUGE!]

[W-Three]

The good thing about NYC is that a) Its the city that 'never sleeps' so there are always people awake when the monster shows up and b) its got lots of landmarks and tall buildings to destroy.

Although at least in L.A they would have a reason for famous actors to be in it. You know, in between one of their movies. "Oh my god a monster! Who will help us?" "Dont worry lady. Actors Guild away!"

But seriously I dont think its an artistic response to 9/11, I think its just JJ wanted a monster movie, and NYC is the typical place.

[SHNIPE]

[nooneimportant77]

how about, no.

[SlushoLover]

[rhialto]

People came together in the wake of 9/11. We thought we knew the enemy was, and unified.

There's way more paranoia in this movie.

And I don't think anyone's blowing up NY in a movie for a while without thinking about 9/11. If he's trying to say anything, I dunno.

[rose]

I don't mean a direct, conscious response, more something that results from an unconscious place. But you guys really think that this movie has no undertones of 9/11? Because, I look at the poster and it looks like it could be a reverse of 9/11 images, fictionalized, of course, and with the Statue of Liberty damage. But maybe I am looking for this 9/11 connection, so that is what I see when I look at the poster. I got this idea while looking at the official poster thread.

It's just a theory I have. Kindof the inverse of Spiderman (the first one) being so popular in part because it made skyscrapers seem safe, even fun, again. I know I read a review of Spiderman that posited the Spidey-makes-skyscrapers-safe theory, it isn't an original thought on my part by any means. I'm sure that Cloverfield will have similar reviews and similar comparisons.

C'mon, look at the poster again.

I think there is something there with the replacement of the human enemy with a monster, but what do I know? I make up theories(as a way of processing the world) and, almost always, a lot of people disagree with them.

For anyone who doesn't know, I live in New York, I'm not trying to sensationalize this movie, this is just a theory.

[Animaniac]

This I touch on earlier in a [spec] thread about a possible volcano. It works better here:

[fleabit]

JJ was in Japan with his kid, saw all the cool city-destroying monster stuff, and though "hey, I think America should have its own monster! Um.. that isn't an ape." And I think that's the extent of it.

It's like Tolkien. People kept telling him he was making the book in a comparison of WWII. He kept saying "no, there was no comparisons I was trying to make, it was a linguistic work first and foremost, and inspired from epics like Beowulf." But people don't believe him, because they like to think they found something nifty.

Reminds of that "secret" language people thought they found. Using certain letters of sentances in books, people were finding astounding messages. Nevermind that with all the letters being repeated as often as they were, you could do the same with any book. And someone in fact did, with Moby Dick. It was pretty funny stuff.

Just saying.. don't try to read too much into it. It's just a monster flick.

[reagan88]

Rose is Right