   Cloverfield --- Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down?
  * Minor spoilers ahead *I saw Cloverfield last night and left not knowing how to feel about it. On one hand, I loved the action, effects and camerawork to where I'd say that Cloverfield is the best action movie since the days of Independence Day and Armageddon, but on the other hand, I expected a lot more explanation.Cloverfield isn't going to leave you feeling relieved that everything's OK. It's not going to fulfill your curiosity of how any of this could have happened, or what the end result of it all was. It's just going to end. And leave the details to your imagination (at least for now ... sequel?). Had I known this was a J. J. Adams (creator of Lost) production I wouldn't have expected anything different, but I went in with too many pre-concieved notions of how this movie should go.So I give this movie a 8/10 because I truly enjoyed the movie while it was happening, but hated the ending and everything it left out.What did you think?   
  I have not seen it, its not yet on here, but looks interesting, here's what the AVGN thinks of it:">Cloverfield: Review;  A movie doesn't need to explain everything to have merit.  A movie doesn't need good exposition and character development to have merit.  A movie doesn't need a good ending to have merit.  A movie doesn't need to have a dynamic plot to have merit.  A movie doesn't need to provide insight into society to have merit.  But I'd prefer if it had at least one of these things.Cloverfield seemed to be lacking in its beginning, middle, and end.  And the camera techniques designed to make it feel more intimate, while successful sometimes, actually made it harder to suspend disbelief in many parts.  The fact that the characters were going back to save someone was the only element that really had me interested, but even though that was the closest thing to characterization and plot development, it still really seemed like it was just written so that the characters would have a reason to put themselves into danger to make it more exciting.I just felt that cloverfield seemed devoid of, well, everything.   ;  I'm not a big movie person, but I decided to go see Cloverfield because I thought it was an interesting take on an otherwise boring genre. I was entertained, and don't regret seeing it. I would highly recommend it to others. Most of the complaints I've been seeing online are completely missing the point, IMHO. The movie accomplished quite well what it set out to do: raw footage of a monster attack. Nothing more, nothing less.I'm actually quite happy that they didn't try to explain the monster. It wouldn't have been as realistic. If a monster attack actually happened, do you really think anyone would have a clue as to what was going on within the first few hours? What possible Hollywood explanation would make this movie better? For me, having a scene where a bunch of government spooks sit around in some snazzy conference room discussing the nature of the monster would have ruined the film -- these sorts of cliche scenes are stupid in every movie. Then again, I think monster/alien flicks in general are pretty stupid, so maybe I'm entirely missing the appeal of being spoon-fed a bullshit plot.;  I liked it. It kept me in suspense the whole time, and there were some awesome scenes.   ;  Hated it. It seemed to be an unholy cross eight legged freaks, aliens , blair witch , Godzilla, resident evil 2, run of the mill vampire/werewolf movie, with all the good parts ripped out. Seriously I was watching the movie and I could identify scenes from the movies I mentioned.I am not a movie critic ( hell I enjoyed slither and shoot em up) but this was a major fail. The monster design was pathetic. I am not a zoologist but the characteristics of the monster did not correspond to anything real or imagined ( keep in mind I accepted xenomorphs and predaliens as a possibility).The monsters animations where horrible. I am a programmer and not an animator or artist , but the few scenes we so the monster made me cringe and cry a little. Not to mention the scale of the monster was not constant (unless there are supposed to me 3 different monsters attacking the city).Plot is horrible, everyt decision the characters made was design to keep them in danger so we could " experience the danger". I am not going into details to avoid spoiling the movie for people who want to watch it, but I have never been so disappointed in a movie.   ;Quote:Original post by mtwI liked it. It kept me in suspense the whole time, and there were some awesome scenes.What suspense ? From the first 3 minutes you would have figured how the movie was going to end. Not to mention they kept giving obvious clues. There was no suspense in the movie what so ever because the movies told you where the characters wheregoing to die within the first minute ( hint when they told you where the tape was recovered ). ;  From the trailers and teasers I've seen, more style than substance I would say. I'm sure the younger generations will lap it up. But I reserve my final judgement until I see it, if I ever see it. In the meanwhile, it leaves me pretty cold. That movie seems to have no focus (camera or plot-wise). A Blair Witch Gozilla, Dear Lord...   ;  Sorry I hated this movie so much that I wish the people who designed the monster , and the people who animated it be shot , then resurrected and then taught the basics of inverse kinematics and then shot again just to drive a point home.   ;Quote:Original post by Tha_HoodRatThere was no suspense in the movie what so ever because the movies told you where the characters wheregoing to die within the first minute ( hint when they told you where the tape was recovered ).That didn't necessarily mean they would have died there. Maybe the guy could have dropped the camera from the helicopter, or the last two people could have chosen to leave the camera there while running away.   