| Posted by: MarcoPolo at July 12, 2008, 9:40 am | | Topic: Cloverfield Forum: JoBlo | | Quote: Originally Posted by X-Nightcrawler How would it be more realistic if these characters found out explanations? It works because the movie tried to be realistic. It's realistic these characters never found out what the hell had attacked them. It'd be manufactured if they somehow manage to go "Oh! So it's THIS that got the monster pissed off!" Same for the second. Why are you surprised that the tiny monsters are easily killed and the big one isn't? The small ones are parasites, the big one's a monster. It's easier to kill an ant climbing on your back than it is to kill you. How is that not sensible? Perhaps this may clarify...Cloverfield has a completely unrealistic monster with unrealistic qualities and never try to address it. The movie tries to blend too many occasions of "plausible" and "implausible" and it just didn't work for me. I think it would have been better if they followed one pattern or the other. Same with the spawn...I can't see the spawn of a completely invincible adult being weak enough to be beaten hand-to-hand...although this problem doesn't hurt the movie nearly as much as the monster...cool-looking as it was... |
| |
Similar entries:
2008 Movies that Disappointed
CLOVERFIELD (no spoilers)
Cloverfield
Cloverfield
What was the Cloverfield monster? What do you think?
Cloverfield (1-18-08 J.J.Abrams project)
Cloverfield
1.18.08 // Cloverfield // J. J. Abrams Project
Cloverfield
Box Office Predictions Thread
|
|
Shared Movies
Over 80 Million Movies and TV-Shows to choose from
Categories:
Movie Trailer TV Series Divx Movie Romance Best Movies Lord of the Ring Movie Review Thriller Movie Movie Quote Movie Rating Spoiler Tragedy Movie History Movie Drama Movie Movie Award Worst Movies Film Festival Celebrities Anime Horror Movie
Links:
Forum Extractor
|