unforum

[KLind]

[DeToxBoy]

[Euchre]

Uh, OK...
So basically again, they've largely told us things we already know.
If there was something TRULY unique in that description, I'd find it much more plausible. It's basically all extensions of what we already know, in factual form from the official sources and the speculation people have put forth.

But then there's the potential errors.
I see one right off - that some 'guy' is trying to find Beth. This makes it sound like it's Rob, and based on some actual footage of the Central Park scene they would appear to end up together - and implications are that it could be permanently. Check out noonimportant77's footage on YouTube, and note how the debris is dropped on them then a black drape is pulled up that obstructs most if not all of the set lights. That to me says they are buried there, or trapped in that tunnel - but together.

A helicopter on the Brooklyn Bridge?
That's a cable suspension bridge, with two relatively narrow roadways seperated by a walkway. Cables are on both sides of each direction of roadway. That's not a reasonable place for any pilot to land or take off, and how would they shoot this scene for the movie?

I think this smells a wee bit fishy.
It may resemble some parts of the real trailer, but I think this is bogus.

[ccarol]

Do you think this might be a fake trailer, I mean like some stuff is actually from the movie, but some other is just to distract us and have us talking about that until it comes out???

[bewarethanatos]

I can't find the post, but I know there was a post around here that talked about Rob and Hawk arguing about someone being dead, about the monster killing her... Does anyone remember what I'm talking about?

[Euchre]

All this talk about Devin Faraci being the one that posted the purported trailer walkthrough got me checking into who the heck that was.
He's been on G4, notably at Comic-Con '07.
He didn't show a very high opinion of JJ Abrams or any of his work.
I am trying to recall, but didn't they do a bit on G4 where they said they knew what the monster was going to be? Something with Doc Brown from Back to the Future?
Think maybe they are trying to prank us - keep in mind, it IS Halloween.
All trick and no treat?

Edit: Thanks to CloverfieldClues' website and comment on it, I was able to find the reference to the G4 bit. They said the monster was Cthulhu.
Need I really say more?

[Helo]

I think you're all suffering from UnFiction-itis. Every time something comes along that hasn't been discovered or "broke" by UnFiction, you guys throw a massive geek fit with a ton of nerd rage.

Get over it. You should be enjoying this, not hating on it.

[bryanflurry]

[InAFieldofClover]

So, from the spoilers we can assume that Rob dies at the end of the film, yet he's narrating an event after it's happened in this supposed trailer. Not only that, but he says something attacked the city, with an emphasis put on thing, implying there's one monster, yet the trailer shows several other smaller monsters?

Yeah. Bullshit.

[bewarethanatos]

[Chump Force 1]

When I read the dialogue of the solider saying "Whatever it is, its winning", it reminded me of speculation on stuff I read a couple of months ago on this and other sites.

Aspects and discussion of what's been described in this trailer that was reported on CHUD can be found;

Here: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/33835
--
And here: http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21015
--
And here: http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20690&

So either these earlier (some date back to early August) predictions were right after all or this new report is bogus.

The fact that its Halloween makes it a little suspect, however its been reported by a confirmed source (although I'd like to know how he got to see it when any info on this movie is harder to get then just about any upcoming release).

Personally to me it sounds pretty cool and I'll keep an open mind. Besides it doesn't really matter, we know if it's accurate on Nov 16.

[e2c]

yea u r all rite! it does remind me a lot of stuff we ve already heard, but then again that makes sense because the people could have simply been right.

what I thought when i read that stuff is: its playing on the post 9/11 trauma even more than i thought. the description of people hiding in a shop, a chaotic atmosphere and the windows breaking. as well as the running into a train station who subsequently blows up. of course it was obvious even before this but yea this just emphasized it a lot - well done JJ. (it will pay out i m sure)

sounds like an awesome movie to me. but why is central park cloverfield...does that maybe mean the monsters "lay there eggs" there? and so all the smaller monsters pop up?

if I get the time i ll do a storyboard/rough cut for it n upload it on youtube.

edit:

isnt paramount going to sue the living shit out of him, if thats all true?

quote from chud.com that made me laugh

[detranova]

This reminds me of Bigfoot footage. Why is it that no one who catches Bigfoot "on film" can manage to do so with a non-sucky camera? And why do they always seem to be having epileptic seizures while trying to record said encounter? Is it seriously that hard to zoom in and hold a camera/camcorder still for that long?

That's kind of why the whole line about bad film quality bugs me. Why would it be of such poor quality? If this guy has the connections to get a sneak peak at the trailer two weeks before its release, then why can't he get a decent look at it? The word quality seems to imply that he was watching some secretly taped copy of the trailer or something (i.e. grainy), which shouldn't be necessary since someone on the inside should be able to just make a copy of it, as opposed to videotaping it off a TV or compressing the hell out of it. I mean, it's a trailer: how hard would it be to sneak out? Besides, he seems to imply that the trailer was an early, unfinished version, passing that off as an excuse for the bad quality. That really shouldn't have anything to do with the quality of the video.

That said, I agree that the dialog sounds too corny, and that whole Brooklyn Bridge/Helicopter/Girls Screaming bit sounds way to confusing. But I am somewhat buying the not seeing the monster thing. I'm guessing it was obscured in a cloud of smoke, in classic JJ Abrams style. Anyway, the level of detail this guy gives seems to either indicate that he's afraid he'll get in trouble for revealing too much, or this is bogus and he(or someone pretending to be him)'s just rehashing what's on the web. But I think I'm leaning towards being more skeptical and thinking this is likely fake, based on the fact that there's no reason to name a movie Cloverfield when 1-18-08's such a better name.

[DeToxBoy]

I realize that their are many parts of this trailer that we have heard already, so this part makes me a little nervous, the point someone made that it is Halloween is a fair assumption.

Given the source im more inclined to believe this is true but also thats not always the most trustworthy outcome. so really all we can do is wait for a debunk from someone or see the trailer for ourselves.

The fact that someone above mentioned about the helicopter being on the bridge does make me agree and wonder, as it would be impossible to land on the bridge, but the writer could have made a generalization when it actually was flying near the bridge and not necessarily on the bridge, i guess we'll see whats thats all about

[Euchre]

The mention of the Brooklyn Bridge and the 'documentary' nature of the reference to Rob Hawkins reminds me greatly of the "I Am Legend" mashup trailer. This makes this trailer rumor sound like more of a joke to me.

Something else that seems a bit wrong is the amount of shots that are either not in a handheld style, and/or would require a LOT of CGI work. The interview with TJ Miller strongly supports this movie being almost or totally exclusively in handheld camera style. The low budget of the movie means there's not a ton of money to spend on CGI, and considering the amount of destruction we've seen suggested from official sources (the teaser trailer and poster) and the fact there's a monster that probably has to be all CGI I doubt there's money to be making CGI scenes of the Brooklyn Bridge and SoL. Those latter shots would also have to be VERY convincing, so they'd actually take a LOT more CGI work than fast short shakey shots of destruction and a glimpse of a monster on the move.
Oh, and how plausible is a guy with a handheld happening to get a ride on a helicopter that's surveying destruction on the SoL?