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 Thu Nov 14, 2024 2:12 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: Reference / Press / Questions
[PRESS] Reeves talks about toys, and Slusho...
View previous topicView next topic
Page 2 of 4 [58 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Author Message
Be@rbrick
Boot

Joined: 16 Sep 2007
Posts: 69
Location: Ohio

 		Somebody mentioned it earlier, but 1-18-08 could be day which the camera is found. If we assume this is the case then the attack happened before that. The ARG/E can still happen in real time, all this would mean is that some time prior to the release date the monster attacks the city. Perhaps at that point we'll start getting flooded with messages on various sites about the attack, possibly fake news reports, etc? I still think that 1-18-08 can mean something if what Reeves says in that interview is actually true and isn't him just throwing us off the scent.

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 7:17 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
djspankypants
Decorated

Joined: 03 Oct 2007
Posts: 264
Location: Tennessee

 		personally i am not going to be freaking out because some pics on one of the websites indicate what day its supposed to be. its not that big of deal.

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 7:21 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
 Back to top 
Slusho Addict
Entrenched


Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 920
Euchre wrote:
What doesn't make much sense is that they are having the online viral campaign happen in real time. It seems a bit odd, maybe even stupid to have the movie release and foretell the events that the 'ARE' will culminate in. What would be the point of such an ARE if they did that?


Nobody knows yet, there may be no more internet updates once the film is released, or even beforehand.


For all we know, the film is set a week earlier, with updates reflecting the monster attack in the lead up to the film's release.
More likely it's set at a non specified 'present day', which stops the film from feeling outdated once it's been out a week.

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 9:24 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
e2c
Unfettered


Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Posts: 338
Location: What is this for? Bob's got cancer - We'll miss you bob!

 		hmm. yea i m a bit confused bout the dates as well...but what i found even more interesting was Reeves mentioning TENTACLES. i loved that. you wouldnt just say that in a sentance like that... i think its a hint - intentional or not intentional ...that doesnt matter.

also he says alien was an influence...so i see the monster in the style of HR giger's stuff....with tentacles...fuckin huge and maybe some brains to laugh at its victims hahah
_________________
you know more about it than I do...

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 9:37 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Euchre
uF Game Warden


Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 3342

 		Speaking of those pics...
They are timestamped on 1-18-08, we all know that...
It was theorized before that they were actually printed on that date and taken earlier - except that Jamie and JJ have inscribed two of them. Last I checked cameras and photo printers don't take handwritten inscriptions and print them on the back of a photo. Jamie's comment is pretty timely too, speaking to Rob in a context of his departure ahead. That establishes that the picture, regardless of when it was taken was printed on 1-18-08, and her commentary would make no sense if it was inscribed after all of this happened - and from other evidence it's unlikely she or Rob survive to participate in such a circumstance. Thus, the folks at Paramount are either exceedingly stupid at continuity (possible) or Reeves is a wee bit mistaken about something (also possible).
_________________
Any sufficiently plausible fiction is indistinguishable from reality.
Any sufficiently twisted reality is indistinguishable from fiction.
Welcome to the new world of entertainment.
ŠEuchre 2007

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 9:40 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
tigerbaby
Veteran

Joined: 29 Oct 2007
Posts: 124

 		maybe the arg will continue after 1-18-08 into the spring/summer to the actual date movie takes place...

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:47 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Chump Force 1
Decorated


Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 286
Location: Next in line after 'Client 9'

 		After reading the various interviews, it seems to me there was internal debate about the name Cloverfield and it was close to being called someting else...my best guess is "Overnight" was going to be title, but for whatever reason it got shot down.

From the IESB interview:
Quote:
It was actually the president, Rob Moore, from Paramount who - because we were talking about making this sort of mysterious, fun trailer to get people excited -- it was his idea to not put the title on it. We said, "Maybe we'll call it Cloverfield, maybe we won't. Who knows?" And then as we started making the movie, it was always Cloverfield to us. The thing that we didn't expect was that there was such a reaction to this trailer and people starting knowing the movie as that and as 1-18-08. It started getting its own sort of momentum. The title that we came up with that we really wanted to go with was another obscure title that had to do with another reference to the film. Once you saw the film, it had quick resonance and we loved the title and were getting very excited about calling it that. But by the time we got to this place, we'd also sort of fallen in love with calling it Cloverfield. We thought, what are we doing, taking the title from one word that people don't understand and find is mysterious to another word that people don't understand and find is mysterious. People already know it as the one word, so why would we do that? And by now we already had, in our heads, been calling it Cloverfield in a more permanent way because that's just what sort of happens over time. So we decided, okay, that's the name of the film. Let's not confuse people further. Let's let that be the title.


Regarding the release date of Jan 18, not being the date the events take place, I don't think Reeves is completely forthcoming. My guess is the date of 1-18-08 was originally intended to be the actual date the monster attacks NYC, but after a while it became obvious that there was going to be too many inconsistencies to deal with (i.e. film being shot in the middle of summer, the temp of 63 degrees in the teaser, etc). Remember, the trailer was filmed before the movie starting filming (according to Reeves interview) and from the 2nd trailer and widget, you can see it was reshot. This is probably the reason why there has been no activity on 1-18-08.com in over 3 months.

Unfortunately, the internet ARG/E campaign was probably created around the date of 1-18-08 being the "date in question". I'm guessing we'll get a few more tidbits, but nothing specific to see how/when the monster is discovered and heads to NYC...this also means we'll probably never know why Rob is going to Japan.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 3:42 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
suckaH
Unfettered

Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 672
Euchre wrote:
What doesn't make much sense is that they are having the online viral campaign happen in real time. It seems a bit odd, maybe even stupid to have the movie release and foretell the events that the 'ARE' will culminate in. What would be the point of such an ARE if they did that?

I dunno, it might be kinda cool to have the different sites explaining more and more after january until the date when the movie actually takes place in. Like 3 months of extra explanation as to where the creature came from and whatnot.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 3:57 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Anteros
Unfettered


Joined: 13 Jul 2007
Posts: 451
Location: The People's Republic of Massachusetts
MrToasty wrote:
Whoa:
Quote:
IESB: The date had played such a huge role in the advertising. Is it true that if you to see this on the day it comes out, 1-18-08, the date in the film is actually that date as well?

Reeves: No, that's not true. The date has become because, again, we didn't have the title in the teaser and so that was a way of letting people know what it was. I think the two ways people referred to the movie where by its codename, Cloverfield, because there was knowledge of that, and just by the date. The reveal is really what happens in the story and the way it unfolds and the sort of mysteries in that world. The date is just the date we come out and when everyone gets to see the movie.

Then WTF with the dates on the pics!?


Hah!! I knew it!!

I just had to get that off my chest. Very Happy
_________________
.
Beware of Geeks bearing Gifs.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 3:30 pm
 View user's profile AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
 Back to top 
m_talon
Veteran


Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Posts: 142

 		Ugh...it's enough to make one's head explode. However, there are a few ways to explain the dates on the pictures (as well as the pictures themselves) and Reeves's statement.

1) The only pictures with writing on them are the ones prior to the event. Those pictures could have been printed out from a digital camera, using a photo printer, right after they were taken. This would of course mean the event takes place on 1-18 and the timestamp is correct.

2) The other pictures could have been printed out at a later date from the camera after it was recovered (like the video footage). I'm ignoring the chef picture, since it's not timestamped.

3) Though the event took place in January, if the movie has bookends that take place at a later date, the statement that "the date in the film" is different is true, Kenobi style. Think "Titanic". It could be safely said that the movie took place in the present, but most of the story is told in flashback to the night of the disaster.

So why the coyness about the date? Because it would be a lie to say all of the movie takes place during GPs attack on 1-18-08, but it would be spoilers to say that part of the movie doesn't. Classic half truth.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:15 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Fignut the Elder
Unfettered


Joined: 30 Jul 2007
Posts: 330

 		not typical
Just remember from this interview....it seems that what we are calling an ARG/ARE...isn't.

I really see the viral aspect of this....from marketing and advertising. Everything we are finding, experiencing, etc...is in a basic relation to this movie, but imho is not a direct leadup/in to the movie itself.
We all thought the date had a major significance...come to find out, it's just a simple release date. Smile
I personally believe Slusho! is the same type of thing...it's a "product" that exists in JJ's Universe, and other ones too aparently(ie, Hero's) but it's not exclusive to just this movie, nor will likely have any direct impact on the storyline. The interview mentioned "...origin...", so perhaps this is a way to tell the story of the origin of a blue frozen Japanese drink called Slusho!...or something to that effect.
I have always been of the mindset that we have really over thought a lot of what's been done thus far in this "ARG/ARE" in direct relation to Cloverfield the movie. BUT, as Reeves said speculation is the fun of this side of the movie, the internet rabid fanbased side.

Not sure I'm making much sense anymore.

Peace.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:06 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
DeniSSe
Boot


Joined: 18 Oct 2007
Posts: 38
Location: Manhattan, NY (NYC)

 		shorter version of interview...
I'm guessing this is a shorter version of the interview for all those tl;dr - ers...

http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/12/14/cloverfield-director-speaks
_________________
"I don't know who you are or where you've come from, but from now on you'll do as I say, okay?" Foily!

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:11 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Fignut the Elder
Unfettered


Joined: 30 Jul 2007
Posts: 330

 		who's a tl;dr?

Anyway, the idea of this entire experience being a "meta story" as Reeves put it makes more sense, it encompasses the movie, our speculation, and much more, or perhaps less...depends on how far the "meta" part of it is taken by the fanbase.

As far a toys go...I want a lego Slusho! stand for my lego destroyed by a monster NYC playset. Very Happy

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:16 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
suckaH
Unfettered

Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 672
Fignut the Elder wrote:
who's a tl;dr?

Anyway, the idea of this entire experience being a "meta story" as Reeves put it makes more sense, it encompasses the movie, our speculation, and much more, or perhaps less...depends on how far the "meta" part of it is taken by the fanbase.

As far a toys go...I want a lego Slusho! stand for my lego destroyed by a monster NYC playset. Very Happy

tl;dr=too long didn't read
Basically a shorter version for those who didn't read the first one because it is too long.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:13 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Enantiomorphic
Boot


Joined: 22 Sep 2007
Posts: 48

 		aicn
the suppository of movie news
ain't it cool news has a couple of new links

matt reeves interview:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35095

and a review that seems to have been written by a loony:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35100

certainly that oddest review i've read in a while (i'm trying to be very diplomatic about it).

PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:37 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 2 of 4 [58 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: Reference / Press / Questions
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