unforum

[IronJ146]

[AfterDystopia]

I dunno... a squiddy, tentacled beast sounds quite nice.

[IronJ146]

[Epaw]

[suckaH]

I find it quite easy to believe the part about him being late to the party, as they could have explained they were expecting him earlier during the time of the party. But the dialogue...it just doesn't seem plausible. Who explains all this crap right in the middle of a monster attack? Granted it may not be right in the middle of the chaos, but still...
Although it fits perfectly with the storyline we have, it is coming from a suspect source and fits too coincidentally with what we have figured out so far.

Is there any way we can see if her ass gets canned within the next following days? That would definitely help...

[UnseenPresence]

There seem to be a lot of statements in this thread that 'this fits well with what we know about the plot'.

I don't think I agree.

Here is what we know:

A monster attacks the city of NYC. We know someone is wearing a Slusho shirt. We know that the characters have MySpace pages and are responding to some people.

And that's about it.

We don't know for absolute certainty that anything in the trailer is in the film itself. (A secod trailer would make this much clearer, but given the secrecy about how the first trailer got made, there's no guarantee). Yes, the actors are the same and that strongly suggests it--but we are not certain.

AICN claims the film will be about footage found afterwards. Was that gained from any other source? AICN has lost some of its cred recently.

AICN also apparently got an email from JJ Abrams. Although I, for one, cannot guarantee that it's accurate (which is not to say that EH is connected--it is NOT). But there is something about that email that's a little strange in my experience. It could be him, it could not.

We have a call sheet that has some strangeness to it. Not the least of which is how it was given.

And now we have this dialogue, that I agree sounds patently terrible simply as the dialogue itself.

There are lots of reasons to not believe this dialogue to be legitimate in any fashion. I've never -heard- of someone being that willing to break an NDA in the entertainment industry...and I work there. If this actually is the dialogue, then the film is going to have real believability problems--which is interesting, given the cinema verite style it's being shot in.

After all, our friendly camcorders make the film seem like everyone's home movie. Then a real monster attacks--that's stretching the believable already (and pretty brilliantly, actually, in the trailer). To then make the monster backstory TOO complicated--and the dialogue too damn wordy and expository--defeats that entire purpose.

The trailer is better than this dialogue.

So I think everyone should remember that we know very, very little so far. And that this dialogue we are discussing could match some of it...and could very, very well be completely false. IMO, it is.

[dunce]

The Beast

[worngmike]

[skeptical1]

[SPEC] Cloverfield dialog

[rose]

[Guest]

Re: [SPEC] Cloverfield dialog

[BobAlhazred]

[WHATEVER]

Re: [SPEC] Cloverfield dialog

[Ecks51]

Re: The Beast

[Darkdragon2]

Re: [SPEC] Cloverfield dialog