Video: “Cloverfield” trailer
posted at 1:26 pm on December 14, 2007 by Allahpundit
I should love this but I don’t. For one thing, it looks too much like War of the Worlds, another sci-fi commentary on post-9/11 jitters. I’m also suspicious of the fact that J.J. Abrams is keeping the script so tightly under wraps given the subject matter. That suggests a twist ending, and we know how twist endings to terrorism metaphors tend to go in Hollywood. And can this really be called an allusion to 9/11 when the end of the clip is practically a frame-by-frame reenactment? It’s an “allusion” the way “JFK” was an allusion to the Kennedy assassination.
One more. If you’re going to do shaky-cam verite to affect realism, how about casting kids who don’t look like they’ve stepped out of a Benetton ad? That’s a terrible problem with all these disaster movies, but especially ones referencing terrorism: When you’ve got nothing but beautiful people walking around, you reduce the drama to little more than a soap opera with a really, really heavy subplot. Is panic your subject or just seeing how the young and pouty rise above the inconvenience of the end of civilization? There were a lot of fatties running from the smoke on 9/11 too, J.J.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Judging from those five minutes, the script is made up of stage direction.
“Hey…let’s go up to the roof.”
“Go…go…run!”
The effects were good, but the 9/11 look-alike stuff was a bit too heavy for me.
Slublog on December 14, 2007 at 1:29 PM
That’s just Hollywood in general… EVERYONE is pretty. Just one of many things that Hollywood has no sense of reality on. Clearly I wouldn’t make it in Hollywood. For one thing I’m a conservative on too many issues and I’m not much to look at really. Not saying I’m ugly as sin but needless to say I don’t have the ladies lining up for me.
Yakko77 on December 14, 2007 at 1:33 PM
I don’t know, I hate to pull the “I was there, dude” crap, but I was there and this makes 9/11 look a backdrop for a really intense party, man. The Statue of Liberty’s head landed in the street and everything. You don’t even know.
Allahpundit on December 14, 2007 at 1:37 PM
Is it a trailer for a movie or the triumphant Hindenburg-esk maiden launch of the Ron Paul blimp?
Weebork on December 14, 2007 at 1:37 PM
Come on. Everyone (well, the cool ones) knows that it’s just a monster movie, but told from the perspective of the innocent bystanders.
Excellent idea. If it was written after 9/11, because of the events on 9/11, then it’s a good interpretation.
Mazztek on December 14, 2007 at 1:37 PM
You mean the Empire state building coming straight down? Clearly cloverfield had planted bombs in it – no building falls straight down when hit with horizontal force.
Looks okay. But reminds me of an FPS game with the tunnel vision.
The fat guy is probably the one holding the camera. After all, that is how hollywood pictures is – a bunch of drooling fat morons. ;)
lorien1973 on December 14, 2007 at 1:38 PM
Yeah, the people taking pictures with their cell phones rather than just RUNNING AWAY was kind of stupid.
Slublog on December 14, 2007 at 1:38 PM
I thought they already did the ‘blimp detonates a nuke above the Superbowl’ movie.
James on December 14, 2007 at 1:39 PM
I hate Hollywood. In their thinking, everyone is beautiful and lives in mansions with marble floors and goes out clubbing every night. If the writers stay on strike forever, I won’t miss them a bit.
If 9-11 had happened on the West coast and all around Hollywood’s elite, the glitterati would still be hiding under their desks and they would be making the loudest calls to do anything and everything possible to stop the terrorists. It all happened just far enough away from them to give them the distance they need to pretend there’s no threat and that Bush is the eeeevil one. And to re-enact 9-11 in craptacular monster movies.
Bryan on December 14, 2007 at 1:39 PM
God I hope the whole movie isn’t like that
tomas on December 14, 2007 at 1:39 PM
The Alias/Lost thralls will flock to it no matter how amateurish the production, no matter how inscrutible of a plot, and no matter how stupid the motivations of the onscreen characters will be to run toward danger, so it will make a ton of money.
And remember, when you point any of this out to a fan of that crap, prepare for a lot of soul-patched edgier-than-thou Mac users with “Cthulu Saves” bumper stickers on their Honda Insights to lecture you on how “you just don’t get it.”
ScottMcC on December 14, 2007 at 1:39 PM
I’m looking forward to “I Am Legend” and “The Dark Knight.”
But being a married guy, I’m going to see “Enchanted” this evening…
Slublog on December 14, 2007 at 1:40 PM
The twist – the monster is George W. Bush!
Seriously, I think this is supposed to be a Lovecraft/Cthulhu type monster.
I’m just wondering if everyone is played out with the shakey-cam still from Blair Witch.
Queasy on December 14, 2007 at 1:42 PM
Yeah, the question will be who created him and how he got to New York. Therein lies the vaunted “message.”
Allahpundit on December 14, 2007 at 1:43 PM
I’m going to pay 9 dollars to see fat people running around? Screw that. I think the movie should be recast with only that little dark skinned hottie running around.
abrown28 on December 14, 2007 at 1:44 PM
After the first flash,I’d be half way to Omaha!haha
canopfor on December 14, 2007 at 1:44 PM
Didn’t a bunch of aliens and a giant lizard already trash New York? I haven’t seen Chicago levelled yet…
Frozen Tex on December 14, 2007 at 1:45 PM
seen it in real life… people are stupid. you should just accept that ;)
Dude! You just don’t get it do you.
abrown28 on December 14, 2007 at 1:48 PM
Ahh, gotcha. That’s what you were shooting for.
Chluthlu rises when you look in the mirror and waterboard three terrorists.
Queasy on December 14, 2007 at 1:53 PM
Bryan,a day after 911,didn’t the actors,Broadway shows,
Hollywood go into bunker mentality,they weren’t sure if
it was safe for THEM to perform,if I remember right!
canopfor on December 14, 2007 at 1:53 PM
So it looked like fire raining down from the sky at one point, causing some of the explosions. Is this a remake of “Independence Day”?
You know, for all my Southern prejudices, I’m just really tired of seeing New York get blown up and torn down. King Kong, War of the Worlds, Independence Day…
It’s old.
And the hyper-cool viral ad campaign for this one doesn’t help, either.
see-dubya on December 14, 2007 at 1:54 PM
Al Gore Warned us we were impeding progress.
tomas on December 14, 2007 at 1:54 PM
I was thinking the same thing about LA and Hollywood – until I remembered that movie about a volcano erupting in LA.
Bigfoot on December 14, 2007 at 1:55 PM
But being a married guy, I’m going to see “Enchanted” this evening…
Slublog on December 14, 2007 at 1:40 PM
Whipped??
You need some scene control!!!
Just kidding…..I know what its like.
RobG on December 14, 2007 at 1:58 PM
I see how you guys can MAYBE interpret this as looking similar to 9/11, but seriosly I got nothing out of this flick other than its going to be a monster movie and quite good at that. I mean, what would you expect a realisitc reaction to be to an explosion in new york? The people at the party yelling GODZILLA IS HERE and running around in circles? OF course they would start jittering about a terrorist attack. And when the building fell, did you expect no smoke or debris to come flowing down the street? We all saw what happens when a building comes fown in new york, and for them not to incorporate that true depiction of how a building collapses in NYC would be stupid. Other than those two things, I see nothing linking this to 9/11.
muyoso on December 14, 2007 at 2:00 PM
Plus, the same aliens that trashed NY also got LA and DC. All at the same time. Plus NY had meteorites rain down in “Armageddon”. AND in “The Day After Tomorrow”, LA got torn up by super-tornadoes, and NY was flooded and frozen.
Frozen Tex on December 14, 2007 at 2:00 PM
You got it wrong, A-Man. No political insinuations or underpinnings here. Just a damn good disaster movie. It’s gonna rock.
Baphomet on December 14, 2007 at 2:00 PM
Wouldn’t the Statue of Liberty’s head be bigger than that? It felt wrong to me.
tickleddragon on December 14, 2007 at 2:03 PM
Jeezze, everything happens in New York.
It’s interesting to watch the trailer from the website.
Roll me over in the cloverfield do it again.
Kini on December 14, 2007 at 2:04 PM
I love sci-fi but there are standards. The ultimate anti-sci-fi element is bad sci-fi.
A certain population, viewing Cloverfield, wonder where the three Nephites are when you really need them. Oh, maybe they’ve been rubbed out from memory, too. Shux, just when they were supposed to show up at the 2nd coming in 2000, they don’t matter or exist any more. From Labyrinth, a protest: “That’s not fair!” LOL, David Bowie.
maverick muse on December 14, 2007 at 2:06 PM
Forget the aesthetics and the politics – what about the physics? There are a few fireballs, many of which just happen to head towards the apartment. Then the Statue’s head just happens to land where they are. I’ve got three words for Mr. Abrams: inverse square law.
This anti-California bias is tiring. Hollywood types spend plenty of time in Manhattan and at least one died in 9/11 (David Angell). The people closest to where it happened think Bush is the evil one, not Iran, etc., so I don’t think distance has much to do with it. Hollywood and San Francisco aren’t much worse than Manhattan and Boston, Bryan.
calbear on December 14, 2007 at 2:07 PM
It’s about time someone made a movie out of Rampage.
Hannibal Smith on December 14, 2007 at 2:07 PM
Well, if the city you were standing guard over just got clobbered, that would be quite a blow to your ego too.
James on December 14, 2007 at 2:08 PM
Well, at least Aliens Vs Predator: Requiem is not set in New York. It is set in a small midwest town.
Queasy on December 14, 2007 at 2:09 PM
I dunno; you might be reading too much into this. Production companies have, over the past couple years, been increasingly unwilling to let out spoilers and to allow prescreenings of movies, especially if they fear the movie is a flop (the January positioning of this one suggests they dont have a lot of confidence in it).
JJ says that his intent with the movie was simply to give America it’s ‘own monster’: “We saw all these Godzilla toys, and I thought, we need our own monster, and not King Kong, King Kong’s adorable. I wanted something that was just insane and intense.” And the fact that New York is the object of destruction doesn’t necessarily imply post 9-11 gitters; New York has been destroyed so many times both before and after 9-11 by Hollywood…
elpidzo13 on December 14, 2007 at 2:09 PM
Ok, yeah…that made me giggle. Good one, James.
But seriously…scale is important in filmmaking. I’m just not as familiar with Lady Liberty’s dimensions, since I’ve literally seen her once in person, from a distance.
(Sorry, this Southern girl prefers London as big city of choice.)
tickleddragon on December 14, 2007 at 2:12 PM
Midwest, or Northwest? I think it was filmed in the Vancouver, BC area, which often stands in for the Pacific Northwest region.
Frozen Tex on December 14, 2007 at 2:12 PM
Godzilla had his ROOT CAUSES firmly based in the Cold War. I guess we can only assume that Cloverfield was created in 1952 to help install the Shah in Iran.
BohicaTwentyTwo on December 14, 2007 at 2:17 PM
Link
We’re both wrong. AvP:R is set in a small Colorado town.
Queasy on December 14, 2007 at 2:18 PM
I’ve been inside ‘the head’ before and I remember the spaces in her crown that you look out of wouldn’t be big enough to fit a person’s shoulders through. You can take that as your extremely rough estimate of scale.
James on December 14, 2007 at 2:19 PM
Don’t forget ‘Planet of the Apes.’ Though that did have a rather wider implication as well.
James on December 14, 2007 at 2:21 PM
I want to see a monster movie set in Edinburgh.
see-dubya on December 14, 2007 at 2:21 PM
Well, at least I was right about Vancouver. Won’t be the first time the area has stood in for Colorado, either.
Frozen Tex on December 14, 2007 at 2:22 PM
Hello? It’s a monster movie! What, these can’t be made anymore without someone shouting “QUIT TRIVIALIZING 9/11, MAN!!”
Nonfactor on December 14, 2007 at 2:22 PM
If you had been following the forum discussion on this, and the viral web-marketing campaign, you’d know that the monster was created — or awoken — by a big bad (Japanese) corporation heedlessly drilling in the Atlantic for a substance used to produce Slusho!, JJ’s fictional drink.
elpidzo13 on December 14, 2007 at 2:22 PM
You and I are on the same page! I couldn’t get past the fact that her head should have been MUCH larger than that. Isn’t it an observation deck or something?
Well…not too sure now! HA!
From the Statue of Liberty “fact sheet” (I need me one of those)
Head from chin to cranium: 17′ 3″ (5.26m)
Head thickness from ear to ear: 10′ 0″ (3.05m)
Distance across the eye: 2′ 6″ ( .76m)
Length of nose: 4′ 6″ ( l.48m)
robblefarian on December 14, 2007 at 2:22 PM
Stock answers Abrams will use to explain the monsters:
1) Human-accelerated climate change by humans interested only in the status quo thaws out the ancient Arctic monster that must feed exclusively on New Yorkers after its millennial slumber
2) Human exploration and subsequent exploitation of the Earth by greedy multinational corporations disturbs the monster’s children and it must seek revenge against the corporate headquarters of the offending corporation
3) Human experimentation (for either dark military or solely profit-based reasons) creates a genetically-grown hybrid monster from a peaceful ocean-dwelling creature to wreak havoc against its creators
Themes to be explored from these tired plot devices:
A) The monster’s only weakness is freezing temperatures, so this disaster could have been prevented if only Bush and his cronies had been progressive enough to sign Kyoto
B) The smaller versions of the monster that rampage through the city to murder and rape are its children, but they also worship the father/mother monster as a god. This is obviously similar to the American Christian mindset
C) The best of intentions to co-exist with Nature through Science are always corrupted by unscrupulous humans for warlike or greedy purposes
The overall point is that humans are terrible and monsters are just something we create because we are the problem.
ScottMcC on December 14, 2007 at 2:25 PM
OK, I went back and looked at it–it DOES seem to small. God, I’m freakin’ neurotic.
robblefarian on December 14, 2007 at 2:25 PM
I’m not offended that he’s trivializing 9/11, I’m saying it makes for a dull, dopey treatment of the subject. You’ve got rich subject matter here. The best you can do with it is use it as a set piece for some Ethan Hawke lookalike to brood ostentatiously?
Allahpundit on December 14, 2007 at 2:26 PM
I don’t get it. Would you be happier if this wasn’t set in New York or would you be happier if the main stars of the movie were ugly?
Nonfactor on December 14, 2007 at 2:31 PM
I’d reserve judgment. J. J. Abrams has had ample opportunity to pin politics on his sleeve with both “Lost” and “Alias,” but has wisely declined to do so. It’s certainly possible that any Hollywood type could have a “coming out” party at any time, and who knows, maybe this’ll be his. But whatever his personal politics are (I honestly don’t know), my presumption would be that he’s simply interested in entertainment, until I’m proven otherwise.
It’s true that some of the imagery in this clip is somewhat uncomfortably close to what we saw on 9/11. But if you’re angle is to make a (reasonably) realistic and scary giant monster movie (i.e., to essentially re-remake the dismal American “Godzilla” the right way), without thought of providing commentary on the real 9/11 or the War on Terror, that might not be a particularly grievous offense.
Blacklake on December 14, 2007 at 2:32 PM
I’d be happier if the movie’s overall themes weren’t so predictable.
ScottMcC on December 14, 2007 at 2:33 PM
Looks like a monster movie to me.
I’m a Lost fanboy, so I trust JJ Abrams enough to provide some solid entertainment and not subliminal political propaganda.
Is there something besides this sneak peak to give you reason to support the allegory? Or is it just New York being obliterated?
SouthernDem on December 14, 2007 at 2:34 PM
Not a Godzilla fan I take it? Or a Romantic Comedy fan (he looses the girl then gets her back)? Or a drama fan (the hero wins in the end)?
Nonfactor on December 14, 2007 at 2:36 PM
Went to the midnight showing of “I Am Legend” last night (as a married guy, I had to go see Enchanted last week in the prime time slot).
It was pretty amazing. Will Smith seriously blew me away. And, really really intense.
nailinmyeye on December 14, 2007 at 2:39 PM
So its a Godzilla movie that hates America’s over-inflated sense of self importance and the outdated concepts of patriotism and nationalism? I assume the statue of liberty’s head smashing to the ground is an allegory about how liberty is dead or something? My, how obtuse. At least in the Matrix you had to think a bit about the underlying meanings to the movies.
Neo on December 14, 2007 at 2:40 PM
Ed Driscoll tells a great story about a screenwriter named Lionel Chetwynd, who went in to pitch a WWII movie about the battle of Dieppe. And some Malibu dinner-party hotshot asked him who the enemy was and he said it was the Nazis. To which the Maliboob responded: “Okay, but who’s the real enemy”?
That’s what I want to know here. There’s a monster, sure, but who’s the real enemy supposed to be?
see-dubya on December 14, 2007 at 2:40 PM
You can keep on assuming that. The rest of us who like to be entertained will sit down in a movie theater and watch what looks to be one of the best monster movies to come out in a while.
Nonfactor on December 14, 2007 at 2:42 PM
J.J., is that you?
Allahpundit on December 14, 2007 at 2:43 PM
Yes, because I’m a heartless, humorless, low-class, Christian moron that believes the world is only 3,000 years old, the gout can only be cured by prayer, TV commercials for tampons are a sin, and George W. Bush gets daily marching orders from Jesus.
Glad to see you’re living up to you name, though.
ScottMcC on December 14, 2007 at 2:43 PM
Blair Witch vs. Godzilla
Honestly, it’s another bunch of clueless young nitwits in a situation way over their heads and all of whom panic just beautifully for the camera.
Big pass until I learn otherwise.
thejackal on December 14, 2007 at 2:47 PM
You found me out!
What does this movie have to do with your hate of tampons?
Nonfactor on December 14, 2007 at 2:47 PM
So Godzilla will end up standing in a corner, staring at the wall?
Frozen Tex on December 14, 2007 at 2:49 PM
Prediction: single wide with a porch.
Matticus Finch on December 14, 2007 at 2:52 PM
Nah, Godzilla will stomp on one of those bundled stick witch effigies and get a splinter, which will cause an infection that, because he has no immunity to Earth’s bacteria, will distract him just long enough for the President to fly an F-18 up into his mouth just as his radiation ray is about to fire, which will make him explode. Then K gets his gun back.
James on December 14, 2007 at 2:56 PM
Strange co-winky-dink, the fellow on the trailer says his name is Robert Hawkins, the same name as the shooter at the Omaha mall.
Royce on December 14, 2007 at 2:58 PM
Remember in the previous extended clips where you have (I’m presuming) a 10th Mountain soldier saying “they’re winning”. Now I’m usually one to hold off on judging, and said correctly that most of you were overboard with 28 Weeks Later, but if you remember the godawful war of the worlds:
TheEJS on December 14, 2007 at 3:02 PM
Some say this movie is actually supposed to be Cthutltu (or however you spell what can’t be phonetically spoken aloud).
CTDeLude on December 14, 2007 at 3:07 PM
Oh BTW Allah/Brian, you guys really should think about adding Libertas to your blogroll. Great little forum for conservative film fans there AND they work to promote conservative film through their festival.
CTDeLude on December 14, 2007 at 3:11 PM
Not impressed, this guy has to use 9/11 type images to make it scary? Not very creative.
I’ll wait for the DVD
conservnut on December 14, 2007 at 3:14 PM
Monster’s a superb candidate for ’08, too.
John from OPFOR on December 14, 2007 at 3:14 PM
OK ENOUGH ALREADY G-D IT…
ENOUGH BLOWING UP NEW YORK, NUKEING NEW YORK, FLOODING NEW YORK, HAVING AN EARTHQUAKE IN NEW YORK OR SHOWING A PLAGUE-RIDDEN APOCALYPSE IN NEW YORK…
I have had it.
NO MORE G-D MOVIES about NY IN RUINS>
HEY HOT $HIT MOVIE DIRECTORS,
GO BLOW UP SOME OTHER CITY. GO BLOW UP CHICAGO, OR MIAMI OR SAN FRIGGIN CISCO.
OR EVEN DENVER IF YOU WANT SCENERY.
ENOUGH ALREADY.
Always Right on December 14, 2007 at 3:53 PM
Would you be happier if this wasn’t set in New York or would you be happier if the main stars of the movie were ugly?
I guess we know where you stand on that question. You’re going to have to deal with it. New York is the biggest most iconic American city and so long as people want to make movies about an American city in disaster (be it monsters, giant apes, or blizzards) chances are it’ll take place in New York.
Nonfactor on December 14, 2007 at 4:01 PM
Always Right on December 14, 2007 at 3:53 PM
Simmer, Cletus. Just a movie.
John from OPFOR on December 14, 2007 at 4:03 PM
Oh, and back to the original post. I think the trailer indicates that the main characters of the movie won’t survive seeing as how their camera was found in ‘the site formerly known as Central Park.’
Nonfactor on December 14, 2007 at 4:05 PM
Anyone else sick and tired of these movies depicting New York getting the shit kicked out of it? Come on, now.
Its Tommy on December 14, 2007 at 4:34 PM
You know, I wasn’t in 9/11. The worst thing that ever happened to me was being at a fireworks display where the finale blew up on the ground. I was standing with a friend about 100-200 ft. away from it. We realized something was wrong immediately, when a large firework blew up on ground level, behind the trees near the field where they were setting them off. It took Bill and me all of ten seconds to get the idea that we should leave, and quickly. But I turned right back because I’d forgotten my purse. (Nowadays, screw the purse. I’d leave it.)
While we ran as fast as we could away from the fireworks exploding on the ground, dozens of morons were running closer. They impeded the emergency services and ambulances, who needed to get there fast to help anyone who might be getting, say, burned by fireworks exploding on ground level instead of hundreds of feet up in the air.
As it turned out, only one fireman was lightly burned, but still–people are idiots. Idiots. I was not surprised to see that scene in the movie. It’s perfectly realistic.
Meryl Yourish on December 14, 2007 at 4:48 PM
That’s what I want to know here. There’s a monster, sure, but who’s the real enemy supposed to be?
see-dubya on December 14, 2007 at 2:40 PM
Answer: the monster.
Jesus, people. Just enjoy what appears to be a well-made kaiju / giant monster film. Or don’t enjoy it. But EVERYTHING Hollywood puts out doesn’t have some sort of stupid “Lions for Lambs” message to it.
Abrams has stated why he made the film. He was in Japan with his kid, they saw a Godzilla toy, he decided that America deserved it’s own giant monster, in its own giant monster film. That’s all. It’s not Cthulhu, and it’s not some big allegory for American imperialism or any such nonsense.
Vyce on December 14, 2007 at 4:48 PM
And oh yeah–I hated Spielberg’s War of the Worlds. I won’t be bothering with this one. Two more hours of oppressive death and destruction? Feh. I can watch the Iraq news in the MSM for that.
Meryl Yourish on December 14, 2007 at 4:50 PM
Why does JJ Abrams continue to get credit for the LOST masterpiece when he hasn’t had anything to do with the show since the first season? Just a pet peeve of mine…
Btw, we’re just a month and a half out of season 4 w00t! 8 eppies is better than nothing…
Patriot33 on December 14, 2007 at 4:52 PM
Mainly because there wouldn’t be Lost without him, considering he created it. Plus he directed what is arguably the 2 best hours of t.v. ever shown (the pilot episodes).
BTW, I’m sorely disappointed we’re not having a full season (well, not that we were anyway.)
SouthernDem on December 14, 2007 at 5:01 PM
Meryl–
WOTW was an abomination. Really, really bad movie. Relentlessly unpleasant all the way through, and I didn’t like any of the characters.
see-dubya on December 14, 2007 at 5:08 PM
I’m with you, See-dub. I mean, what was the point of the Tim Robbins scene? Really. Dreary, awful film.
I can’t remember the last good monster/disaster type film. What has there been since Aliens and T2? Not a whole lot.
I’m hoping the new Terminator miniseries on Fox next month is decent.
Maybe it’ll get me to exercise again. Linda Hamilton got me off my butt and into the gym after I saw that movie. I never looked like her, but I did get a kick out of training with weights.
Meryl Yourish on December 14, 2007 at 5:13 PM
J.J. Abrams is a hack. I’ve never seen anything by him that I’ve liked. I think its rather telling that the studio has decided to release this film in mid-January, a time usually set aside for movies the studio expects to be duds at the box office. I expect it will do decent business on opening weekend due to the hype but then quickly fizzle out.
Rip Ford on December 14, 2007 at 5:42 PM
How can that awful handheld camera style be justified when they have a huge special effects budget? The producer/director needs lessons on how to film in the single camera style.
Resolute on December 14, 2007 at 5:57 PM
The new Star Trek crew (well, recast original series crew), brought to you by one J.J. Abrams.
spec_ops_mateo on December 14, 2007 at 6:12 PM
Given the relative ages at the time of the Original Series, shouldn’t Chekov be a little younger? Like, still in junior high? And shouldn’t Spock’s mother be a little older?
Frozen Tex on December 14, 2007 at 6:18 PM
BUSH LIESES, CTHULHU RISES
We’ve noticed.
Jim Treacher on December 14, 2007 at 6:34 PM
Well, I Am Legend was originally set in Compton/South Centeral LA, and starred a german/irish whitey.
Now, it’s in New York, starring a black guy.
Either way, no one wants to see nasty people on the big screen. And, they aren’t really heroes, either.
Mazztek on December 14, 2007 at 7:46 PM
Need coffee, can’t type.
Mazztek on December 14, 2007 at 7:47 PM
All this 9/11 allegory and “what’s the hidden message” stuff is going right over my head. I was one of those poor dopes who thought there was going to be a clever little game hidden in the first trailer so I know way more about these stupid trailers and the movie than I probably should. I’m not seeing anything even close to what most of you guys are seeing.
I’m seeing a giant monster movie where JJ Abrams is trying to do something just a teensy bit different than other giant monster movies. Maybe it’ll work and maybe it won’t. But I”m not seeing big anti-Bush conspiracy here.
Jimmie on December 14, 2007 at 8:12 PM
And the book was more about vampires and the movie is more about zombies. So? We’re talking about Cloverfield, not a poor adaptation of I Am Legend.
Nonfactor on December 14, 2007 at 8:18 PM
1) I’m sure I’ll see Cloverfield, unless it becomes blindingly obvious that it is, in fact, some whiny anti-American-subtext annoying crap. Won’t be able to say until people see it and start commenting.
Some people just aren’t sensitive to that kind of thing, and good for y’all. I just have Hollywood Overload, I guess.
2) 90% of sequels and remakes are crap. AVP actually started out okay, but fell into several really pathetic genre conventions. The new one sounds like it IS a really pathetic genre convention. (The hyper-advanced aliens can detect alien parasites, they just don’t bother when it comes to protecting their ship… pull the other one.)
Merovign on December 14, 2007 at 9:51 PM
Lame people, lame acting, lame wooden dialogue. Game Over, Man!
Tzetzes on December 14, 2007 at 11:36 PM
The first season was by far the best season.
Season 2 was horrible, and season 3 was good but didn’t quite redeem the show.
I’m willing to give Abrams the benefit of doubt here, but I won’t be rushing to see this movie before reviews have been written.
Not really, and I’m not saying that because I dislike New York. The city is freakin huge. It’s larger than some other states, and the people are bunched up so close together.
When a disaster hits New York, so much is at stake that it makes the event more dramatic automatically.
I grew up in Houston. It’s the fourth largest city in the nation, but it’s still less than a fourth the size of New York. On top of that, the city is very spread out. Shut down one part of Houston, and the rest will be able to keep on moving.
Esthier on December 15, 2007 at 1:10 AM
So does Smeato.
Captain Scarlet on December 16, 2007 at 9:51 AM
Funny how New York City is the Hollywood disaster magnet of the world. Every comet, meteor, tidal waves, killer blizzards, alien invaders, city-sized alien warships, giant lizards, giant apes, giant robots, human-mutating viruses and super villians always picks on poor old New York City.
Everytime I see an meteor in a movie hit New York I think “wow, that has to be the smartest meteor ever”. It not like it just landed in the oceans, which cover 2/3′s of the Earth, or hit desolate areas like Siberia, Sahara desert, the middle Australia or just some cornfield in Ohio. Nooooo, it found it’s way straight to tiny lower Manhattan…;-)
On a serious note though:
I guess Hollywood decided that enough time has past since 9/11 that now they exploit it….errrr….I mean go back to making coincidental, exploding disaster movies there with falling skyscrapers, walls of smoke billowing down streets and people running in fear through the city streets without any public backlash from it. I guess the only thing that surprises me is Hollywood didn’t make a movie like this within months of 9/11 to try to cash in. I guess they have heart afterall in La-La Land. Maybe for JJ Abram’s sequel he could fly to Hiroshima or Nagasaki and make a film about aliens who drop atomic devices on their cities too. About the same thing he’s doing here, but he would even be more justified because the real event there happened over 60 year ago, not six years ago like New York, right?
Planet Boulder on December 16, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Looks like it has potential to me. But I liked Godzilla vs. Space Godzilla, just so you know where I’m coming from.
Asher on December 16, 2007 at 3:52 PM
I fell asleep about 30 minutes in and woke up briefly to see the Tim Robbins “war of occupation” speech before I was out again. It was an action movie consisting of the so-called hero running away from the action in between lingering shots of America’s favorite toothy midget slapping his tiny hand over America’s favorite precocious moppet’s emoting eyes or screaming mouth.
Some called it a “suspense” movie. Well, the suspense of waiting for something to happen in that movie wasn’t enough to keep me awake…
The studio wanted Gary Sinse (the star of a hugely successful TV show on a network with the same corporate parent as the movie studio) cast as McCoy, but Abrams pushed back. Sinse is not in every scene of CSI:NY and wouldn’t be in every scene of the new ST movie so the excuse is not because of time commitments or because Sinse is not a bankable star… Let’s not kid ourselves about Abrams’ politics influencing his entertainment productions.
And if John Cho doesn’t have the balls to do a George Takei impression in this new ST movie (with a creepy “oh my” thrown in for good measure), he should expect a boycott of Harold and Kumar 2.
Treacher Wins.
Fatality.
ScottMcC on December 18, 2007 at 2:50 PM