Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
 
The time now is Mon Nov 25, 2024 3:52 am
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)
View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
Completely ridiculous: SD card can't be recorded over
View previous topicView next topic
Page 2 of 9 [133 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, ..., 7, 8, 9 Next
Author Message
darkgoob
Boot

Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 11

m0r1arty wrote:

As for the SD card darkgoob. It states it is an SD card whenever the US military info is up on screen, the "Case designated Cloverfield" part.

I'd say the military have taken back-ups of the original footage which were on film, and in this particular instance we are watching a copy from an SD card. Nothing more.


Then why does it show Hud holding a Panasonic HDC-SD1, which is an HD SD-card based camera, in the photos on 1-18-08.com?

Psych wrote:

Also, yes, they may have used that camera to film, but how do we know that's meant to be the kind of camera used within the story? Which is why I'm saying, within the context of the story, the camera being used uses tapes.


I agree that within the context of the story, it's a tape-based camera. Its run-time is 84 minutes, which could fit on a standard Mini-DV cassette if that cassette was recording standard-definition video (4:3 aspect ratio) on LP-mode (long-play, a more compressed format). This would look like crap on a movie screen, BTW.

I don't think they expect you to think it was filmed on a standard-definition, 4:3-aspect-ratio camera. But that's the only possibility within the story. Then how did it turn magically into high-definition, wide-screen aspect ratio? Special DoD upsampling technology? Give me a break.

They expect you to think that it was an HD camcorder.

Psych wrote:

It also wouldn't make sense for this to be a dream while the director Matt Reeves is talking about other people having cameras that night as a possible idea for a sequel.


That's pathetic. It would have been cool if it was a dream.

-=DG=-

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:04 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Roe
Boot

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 58

On another thread it was already established the camera JJ and company said was used for the film doesn't have night vision--a clear contradiciton for the film.

I'm not insulting, but please don't forget the ARG and this movie are about making money. I am pretty sure Panasonic paid to have their name and one of their camera brand names used. The camera was given away in some of the fan contests (whatever you want to call them) prior to the movie, as I recall.

The beginning of the movie does says it's an SD card, and from what I can tell, since this topc seems to really bother a lot of people, the SD card probably wouldn't allow a recording exactly like the movie suggests.

OK, suspension of reality. It's a film about a monster attacking NYC after all.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:29 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
alptraum
Boot

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 15

Roe wrote:
On another thread it was already established the camera JJ and company said was used for the film doesn't have night vision--a clear contradiciton for the film.

The beginning of the movie does says it's an SD card, and from what I can tell, since this topc seems to really bother a lot of people, the SD card probably wouldn't allow a recording exactly like the movie suggests.

OK, suspension of reality. It's a film about a monster attacking NYC after all.


I pretty much agree with that. I don't think that what was in the movie could have happened camera wise for the most part. The features of the camera+run time+ability to withstand the shocks it took+night vision+flash+blah blah blah. I think it was mainly used as a plot device. I don't think it was a dream sequence, just some sort of super camera that probably does not exist.

Certainly I think that no digitally based camera that I know of could have the "tape over" moments that allowed many parts of the film to happen.

In the end, they were trying to tell a story. And they were ok with playing pretty loose with technology when it suited that end.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:44 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Roe
Boot

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 58

By chance I reread the production notes for the film. I've pasted the relevant section dealing with these flashbacks people keep discussing below.

It just helps to put into context of why things were done in the film, from an artistic standpoint.


Quote:

Reeves also skillfully interweaves an important storyline throughout the film, that of Rob and Beth's (Odette Yustman) earlier relationship. Hud is unknowingly taping over an earlier recording Rob had made with the camera of intimate, quiet time spent with his mate. "You see their loving gaze. It's this small love story," says Reeves.

"So I began thinking, 'Isn't there some way to make that kind of a parallel story?'" The film actually begins with some of this footage – much of it shot by Michael Stahl-David himself using a small video camera. But additional portions also appear interspersed throughout the movie, typically after some shocking event has caused Hud to briefly shut off the camera, allowing a brief portion of Rob's original recording to play for the audience before Hud picks up the current action again.

"We're seeing the aftermath of two people who have longed to be together, and somehow finally come together, crosscut with this other event," the director explains. "By going back and forth between these two pieces, you end up heightening the drama. By looking back at this relationship and what it could have been, the audience starts to put the pieces together as to why Rob is so eager to rescue her."

"One of the things we thought was incredibly important in a movie with so much kineticism," notes Reeves, "was to have places where you could stop and reconnect with the characters. After going through these extreme experiences, we give them a chance to react to what they've been through before moving them to the next level. Having these dramatic interludes was extremely important. Without them, you'd just be watching a video game."

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:37 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Slusho Addict
Entrenched


Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 920

Euchre wrote:
If the actual footage is a raw stream of some sort, even with the file table information on the card (much like how an audio CD works), one could manage to record over it in stretches like that.


Exactly, there's hundreds of programs out there that will let you create a new FAT from a corrupted SD card, letting you view all the deleted data or partially overwritten files.

Yes, you have to delete the file first, but that doesn't stop it from being undeleted later.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:37 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
TheRabbit
Boot

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 54

The movie specifically states that the camera was found.
The movie states that what we are watching is the SD card used as evidence for the DoD.

They found the camera, it was in bad shape, they transfered everything to an SD card. Only plausable explanation I'm aware of.

We have no footage of the camera itself in the movie, Hud never looks into a mirror where you can see what kind of camera he's holding.

Don't try and argue that you can see what kind of camera it is in the press releases where they have a photo of Hud holding a video camera, as there are 3 different cameras that were actually used to film the movie, it doesn't work like that.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:09 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
darkgoob
Boot

Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 11

Slusho Addict wrote:

Exactly, there's hundreds of programs out there that will let you create a new FAT from a corrupted SD card, letting you view all the deleted data or partially overwritten files.

Yes, you have to delete the file first, but that doesn't stop it from being undeleted later.


Yes, except the main character *does* say that it's a tape, and asks if it was removed before the recording was done, because he was worried about it being recorded over. I.e. he didn't want to lose that memory, but then he brushes it off because he feels like "hey, she's with someone else now, so f-it."

TheRabbit wrote:

They found the camera, it was in bad shape, they transfered everything to an SD card. Only plausable explanation I'm aware of.

We have no footage of the camera itself in the movie, Hud never looks into a mirror where you can see what kind of camera he's holding.

Don't try and argue that you can see what kind of camera it is in the press releases where they have a photo of Hud holding a video camera, as there are 3 different cameras that were actually used to film the movie, it doesn't work like that.


OK here's the problem with this. If you were going to transfer evidence to something for safe keeping, YOU WOULD NOT PUT IT ON AN SD CARD. Look. SD cards are NOT a secure storage medium -- no type of flash memory is. I refuse to believe the Department of Defense has an archives that consists of a library full of SD cards.

I can guarantee you that Defense Department archives exist on multiple redundant backed up data servers as well as tape backup and optical disks.

The only reason they mention SD card at the beginning of the movie is that they expect us to believe the movie was recorded with an SD-card camcorder, which is also why an SD-card camcorder is shown in the promotional materials. That's the only way it could have been recorded in HD and be 84 minutes long.

Also the production stills of the movie clearly show the characters using a Panasonic SD-1 camera:
http://gizmodo.com/347463/the-real-camera-behind-cloverfield.

Further if you google "cloverfield sd card" then you will find that everyone who has seen this movie comes away thinking it was supposed to have been filmed on an SD card, because that's what it says in the opening shot.

But unfortunately the script makes this inconsistent with the rest of the movie. This is not a matter of "suspension of disbelief," it's a matter of "plot inconsistency."

You see, once you've suspended your disbelief, then if they change stuff around during the movie, and there are plot holes and inconsistencies, then it messes with that.

For example *if* the monster had scales and no tail in one shot, but in another shot, it had a tail and no scales, then people would've been like, "This movie sucks. The filmmakers messed up. The monster changes during the movie." And your argument that "it's fiction, deal with it" would not be valid, because I would counter that "it's bad fiction, deal with it."

And so what I'm saying is that the entire premise of this movie -- that a character recorded it with a video camera that uses SD cards -- is flawed and inconsistent with the way the movie was edited (as if it was shot on tape) and the character dialogue (which again, indicates it was shot on tape). And the idea that the Department of Defense backs its data up on SD cards, or even stores any of it on SD cards, is just plain retarded, and is a stretch because you are trying to make sense out of something that makes absolutely no sense.

I just don't understand how people making a movie that costs this many millions of dollars, and is made BY people who use cameras every day, could possible mess up something this central to the plot. That's retarded as well.

-=DG=-

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:43 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
mistermunky69
Veteran


Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 78
Location: Wareham, Ma

I almost wish your dream theory was true. I really do.

Because then, maybe it would be Marlena's dream, and that would make her still alive. Crying or Very sad

other than that, im out.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:55 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
carnus
Boot

Joined: 30 Aug 2007
Posts: 30

 

My Camera can record movies onto a card or DV tape. Wouldn't be too far fetched to believe that both tape and card were used.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:59 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
samuron
Boot

Joined: 15 Jan 2008
Posts: 22

The camera used by the character "Hud" allowed data to be recorded over, and had night vision capability.

The "part" of the camera was played, in one teaser promotional photo, by a Panasonic HD.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:02 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
CoffeeJedi
Unfictologist


Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 1327
Location: Charlotte NC, USA

You guys are funny.

I'd just like to also add that there isn't a camera that can record binaural audio in full Dolby Digital 5.1 channel surround sound with seat-shaking bass response either. Rolling Eyes
_________________
seeker > !seek canoe
!splotch


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:03 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
golfguitarist
Boot

Joined: 14 Jan 2008
Posts: 13

hahaha, i agree with you coffee.

whether the movie was taped on a tape, or on a SD card, or transfered on to and SD card...... its still a good movie. And if you disprove that by saying that its "fake" b/c you couldnt do this or that with an SD card........... rememebr this movie is about a monster. The movie itself is fiction and fake. And if you watch some of the behind the scenes footage of the movie, they arent even filming with camcorders on all the shots. so what!

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:15 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
danieltx13
Kl00

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 42

CoffeeJedi wrote:
You guys are funny.

I'd just like to also add that there isn't a camera that can record binaural audio in full Dolby Digital 5.1 channel surround sound with seat-shaking bass response either. Rolling Eyes


Exactly Laughing

Y'all need to chill out, stop taking the movie so seriously, and just enjoy it as entertainment.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:16 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Climhazzurd
Veteran


Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Posts: 91

DG, why are you pushing this to be a dream? Pretty obvious it's your M.O. for pointing out this minor inconsistency.

Can you imagine if this were filmed mainstream monster movie style, only to have Rob awaken from his sleep in Japan, breathing frantically, then cut to credits?

I mean, it worked in Mr. Brooks but come on. Wink

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:16 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
theShaggy
Unfettered

Joined: 17 Sep 2005
Posts: 417
Location: Toronto, Ontario

Holy guys, you know what I just realized?

Hud was filming the whole night, over EIGHT HOURS, but the HDC-SD1 only has a battery life of 97 minutes! Even if he kept turning it on and off, he didn't when the helicopter fell (and the sun came up while they were knocked out), and he used lights and night vision and stuff!

Guys this MUST NOT BE A REAL THING! OMG only artistic license could have done something like that. Maybe, though, it was intentional, that it's all a big conspiracy? The Government must have taken the footage and put a CGI Mister Grumpypantz on top of C'Thulhu, who is clearly paving the way for Voltron and Giant Lion to attack.

</sarcasm>

Chill out about the aberrant tech like that. If they went for utter, complete realism with everything, then the movie would not exist the way they wanted it to be filmed. It would just not be possible to tell the story in the time they were trying to tell it, in the way they wanted to tell it. To assume that the subtle license they take with it implies something as huge as "it was all a dream" is the most extreme type of nitpicking.

DG, do you have any other reason to think it's a dream?
_________________
The Shaggy?
Playing nothing.
Being a student. Stupid education.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:17 pm
 View user's profile AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
 ICQ Number 
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 2 of 9 [133 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, ..., 7, 8, 9 Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group