Author
Message
Poppin
Boot
Joined: 29 Nov 2007 Posts: 29
Fake...And I have 95000 reasons why.....Firstly, there is no way that in that scene in which YOU SAID that you see the monster for the first time, is the first time you see it. The producers are all saying how hard it was to put in shots through the HandyCam and show the monster...THE PIC SHOWN IS DEFINITELY NOT VIDEO FROM A HANDYCAM...That scene was probably made for the trailer only...And I'm willing to put money on it...The ONLY reason that you are getting away with your trolling is that nobody that's a regular will step in this thread with the spoiler tag and the obvious lie that you haven't seen the movie....No way this movie takes place on May 22/23...Your description is awful...You left huge holes in your "Spoiler" simply so people could use their imagination to fill those in...The monster WILL NOT look like that....Wow..Did I miss anything?...And Slusho Addict, While I've been lurking I would honestly expect you to see all the holes in this that I do...Don't know why you don't TBH...
Oh yeah, By the way, don't use the "That's one of the scenes they see on the news on the camera"..Cause that's definitely Not a HandyCam recording a TV....So yeah, See ya later....
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:55 am
tigerbaby
Veteran
Joined: 29 Oct 2007 Posts: 124
few ?s
is monster seen rubbing off little monsters against a building?
is there any thing else the monster does to people? the aicn review allude to a 3rd thing monster could do to people. any significance of 'cheese' code name?
is there an actual 'special' reason rob wants to save beth? (i.e. she's knocked utheir engaged) or is it just how in love they are?
thanks!
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:00 am
Crushed
Boot
Joined: 15 Dec 2007 Posts: 11
RAWR!
I R MISTAR GRUMPYPANTS! (my masterful artistic rendering of your description)
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:02 am
Crushed
Boot
Joined: 15 Dec 2007 Posts: 11
Poppin wrote:
Fake...And I have 95000 reasons why.....Firstly, there is no way that in that scene in which YOU SAID that you see the monster for the first time, is the first time you see it. The producers are all saying how hard it was to put in shots through the HandyCam and show the monster...THE PIC SHOWN IS DEFINITELY NOT VIDEO FROM A HANDYCAM...That scene was probably made for the trailer only...And I'm willing to put money on it...
http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/03/new-cloverfield-details-emerge/
Quote:
The beginning of the film was show with a lightweight Panasonic HD HandyCam, "then moves into transitional sequences shot with a 3-lb. Canon for about a third of the film."
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:04 am
saldb
Kilroy
Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 1
Does the monster look like this:
http://www.conceptart.org/artimg/image.php?img=smellybug/full/creture13.jpg
(with a different head?)
Found this online
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:07 am
Blastanoid
Kilroy
Joined: 14 Dec 2007 Posts: 2
Another question In the viral-video on You Tube we saw some debris fly out of the water. In the teaser and the trailer we saw debris fly in the sky… so it's possible that the monster could eat thing and the shoot out non edible part from his back (like a whale).
Is it true?
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:10 am
dalphx
Entrenched
Joined: 02 Oct 2007 Posts: 801 Location: Partying in Batcave with Lily & Beth!
Re: Another question Only question I have is....Is jamie in the movie and does she get killed?
Didnt see it listed in questions as went thru this topic fast!..lol
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:15 am
blaaaaaah
Unfettered
Joined: 23 Nov 2007 Posts: 313
Spoiler (Rollover to View):
HAH! Look who was right! Mini Monsters.. AND Slusho and Tag aren't ever mentioned!
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:18 am
Soci
Decorated
Joined: 19 Jul 2007 Posts: 205 Location: Brooklyn!
InAFieldofClover wrote:
How the HELL does the movie take place in May? May? And in what year? Rob on his myspace said he's leaving for Japan towards the middle of this month.
What the hell is going on with that? That part of all of this actually ruins a good chunk of the movie for me. Of course I'll see it, probably enjoy it, but this continuity error just makes no sense whatsoever.
or.. maybe with the Chuai thing, even tho they got approved by the AFA, Tagruato has Rob start later than he was supposed to.. maybe the game will answer those questions.
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:28 am
Soci
Decorated
Joined: 19 Jul 2007 Posts: 205 Location: Brooklyn!
Re: Another question
dalphx wrote:
Only question I have is....Is jamie in the movie and does she get killed?
Didnt see it listed in questions as went thru this topic fast!..lol
Spoiler (Rollover to View):
LC said that she was in the movie, and at the party, but you only see her passed out on the couch. She doesn't have speaking parts
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:32 am
SLUSHO!
Boot
Joined: 10 Jul 2007 Posts: 43
I'm a very skeptical person, and I'd love to say that none of this is true and I'm still going to be very surprised by the movie but I think I just read a very detailed summary of the movie.
And I'm angry.
L.C. Are there IMPORTANT details that you haven't mentioned yet?
I'm an idiot for reading this. Oh well, if the monster is on par with my mind, it should still make me very pleased.
I'm VERY angry that the movie is taking place in a different time frame. I'm also VERY angry it doesn't detail where the monster came from. I would have LOVED to see it crawl out of the water. Also would have loved to see it rip the statues head off.
I guess I'll live, but I'm disappointed as fuck.
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:33 am
rocksmars
Unfettered
Joined: 19 Dec 2007 Posts: 305
I don't know if this is fake but I do have a couple of problems.
1 is the date thing. I have no doubt they never intended the movie to be about 1-18-08 as the weather is wrong in the movie but the only mentions of the date in the movie could easily be fixed in post production.
Once they made the date so important then they should have taken the time and money to make it work.
2. Beth and Rob. Nevermind the ARG the actor playing Rob makes it clear in interviews that a big part of Rob's motivation for looking for the new job is that things with Beth are not going anywhere and he's in love with her.
If he was bedding the woman of his dreams and had one of the best days of his life with her I think that qualifies as things are going good with Beth wouldn't you?
Either this review is wrong or those are some major errors IMHO.
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:38 am
Last edited by rocksmars on Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
blaaaaaah
Unfettered
Joined: 23 Nov 2007 Posts: 313
rocksmars wrote:
I don't know if this is fake but I do have a couple of problems.
1 is the date thing. I have no doubt they never intended the movie to be about 1-18-08 as they weather is wrong in the movie but the only mentions of the date in the movie could easily be fixed in post production.
Once they made the date so important then they should have taken the time and money to make it work.
2. Beth and Rob. Nevermind the ARG the actor playing Rob makes it clear in interviews that a big part of Rob's motivation for looking for the new job is that things with Beth are not going anywhere and he's in love with her.
If he was bedding the woman of his dreams and had one of the best days of his life with her I think they qualifies as things are going good with Beth wouldn't you?
Either this review is wrong or those are some major errors IMHO.
It's been mentioned that apparently they used to be lovers and then they broke up.
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:42 am
Slusho Addict
Entrenched
Joined: 24 Nov 2007 Posts: 920
rocksmars wrote:
If he was bedding the woman of his dreams and had one of the best days of his life with her I think they qualifies as things are going good with Beth wouldn't you?
Either this review is wrong or those are some major errors IMHO.
That happens 4 weeks earlier, a lot can happen in that time.
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:43 am
rocksmars
Unfettered
Joined: 19 Dec 2007 Posts: 305
One other thing....I certainly hope this review is fake.
Nothing against the poster.
But based on this and the production notes I am feeling less inclined to pay 10.50 to see this.
People running from dogs is dumb if you have access to weapons unless there are huge numbers of them. The most they run into is 2?
Come on!
Barely seeing the monster. Unless somebody gets on here and proves there is at least one shot full on of MGP and he stares into the camera and screams then I sure the hell am not paying 10.50 to see it. Whta's dumb about that is it's clear they have a perfect scene for it when HUD bites it.
Morning with great light, Central Park with wide open shots and MGP comes right at the camera but yet you only see his face????
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:47 am
Display posts from previous: All Posts 1 Day 1 Week 2 Weeks 1 Month 3 Months 6 Months 1 Year Sort by: Post Time Post Subject Author Ascending Descending