Come on, Cliff. I saw the movie the moment it came out; the "hivemind internet culture" was MEGA FUCKING EXCITED and the hype train was in high gear. I went into it with starry eyes and I hated it.
Don't discredit people's opinions just because you think they're part of the "hive mind"
I didn't say you Brian. The entire internet hates it, and I am not sure why? It seems like a reasonably decent film to me. Look, there is this culture of hype and instant opinion without digestion. This movie was damned by critics less than a day after release and I am being sincere, I thought it was pretty good I mean not Blade Runner good, but a serviceable decent sci fi horror film. It almost seemed to me that the sub story was... Well Paramount was not that high on it so they dumped it on Netflix... which to me may have colored the critical perceptions.
@Cliff_Forster said:
I didn't say you Brian. The entire internet hates it, and I am not sure why? It seems like a reasonably decent film to me. Look, there is this culture of hype and instant opinion without digestion. This movie was damned by critics less than a day after release and I am being sincere, I thought it was pretty good I mean not Blade Runner good, but a serviceable decent sci fi horror film. It almost seemed to me that the sub story was... Well Paramount was not that high on it so they dumped it on Netflix... which to me may have colored the critical perceptions.
The entire internet hates it for a good reason. It was the worst parts of Gravity mixed with Final Destination and some random humor sprinkled on top for no apparent reason other than Chris O'Dowd not being able to act.
I wouldn't have paid to see it in theaters, but seeing it on Netflix wasn't a total waste of my time. I was entertained, but it wasn't as good as the other two movies at all.
The entire internet hates it for a good reason. It was the worst parts of Gravity mixed with Final Destination and some random humor sprinkled on top for no apparent reason other than Chris O'Dowd not being able to act.
I'm not sure I see the correlation to Gravity? Gravity wasn't a science fiction film, it was a character study survival story with science fiction elements. I can't see how they relate that closely. Sure it was in space, a lot of films use that setting (because space is awesome). Final Destination I just don't know because I have never bothered to watch one of those.
I think it probably borrowed more from Alien and Event Horizon. And to @primesuspect point, if this isn't in the Half Life universe, they certainly borrowed inspiration from it. For me, the original is the weakest film of the three. Hud is there, obviously a nod to gaming culture, carrying the Blair Witch camera and the whole time you are thinking... Man, could something eat Hud already?? 10 Cloverfield Lane is incredible. Paradox is good. I like how they are crafting the universe. I hope the perceived failure of the current film does not kill the franchise. It's imperfect but it has a load of potential.
Look, I'm not saying Paradox is a superlative instant classic of a film. As a science fiction movie though, it's not bad, in fact it's pretty good. It has a neat premise that creates a serious moral and ethical dilemma for the main character. That alone made the narrative interesting for me. Also the attempts at humor were not so bad (I admit, not that great either). I've been in situations stressful enough that joking is a way to deflect some negative emotion, it's a fairly natural human defense mechanism. Not everyone screams and cries, some people tell terrible jokes to cope. That's how I saw the character, it's his stress response, he jokes, poorly....
I just think the internet is mean sometimes. It's like people love to kick something in the teeth, and if they see enough people kicking it in the teeth they figure, okay, here is an acceptable target for me to get this frustration out of me. The world needs fight club for real. The Cloverfield Paradox shouldn't be the target of anyone's ire.
I don't see how it created a paradox. A both dimensions already exist along side each other. Why does a lot of energy make that any worse? Maybe it's my bad understanding of quantum theory.
After that the ship just tries to actively kill them? Teleporting worms and crewmen sure, you literally moved to another existence. But why the wall eating arms? Is the ship now alive?
Also I'm assuming this is the future. I'm which case when they come back "now" says they returned. But if they came back to "now" then what fell near New York 7 years ago? Did the monster and them split times from a single event? If they both fell 7 years ago, then how did they detect them returning "now"? If this isn't the future then why is New York not also suffering from oil shortages, unless i missed that comment in the original film.
Random side note as well. When the dude rescues the little girl and takes her back to what appears to be a bunker, anyone else notice her face looking around like "ah shit, this guy is a weirdo, I'm not in a good place right more". But then they just kind of ignore that storyline.
@d3k0y said:
Random side note as well. When the dude rescues the little girl and takes her back to what appears to be a bunker, anyone else notice her face looking around like "ah shit, this guy is a weirdo, I'm not in a good place right more". But then they just kind of ignore that storyline.
Yeah, the entire plotline with the little girl, her parents, and her rescuer was just.... completely and utterly pointless. It had nothing to do with anything, didn't drive the plot forward at all (it didn't like... put her husband in a different place or anything), and was thoroughly dropped like a hot potato. It was a waste of time.
@d3k0y said:
Random side note as well. When the dude rescues the little girl and takes her back to what appears to be a bunker, anyone else notice her face looking around like "ah shit, this guy is a weirdo, I'm not in a good place right more". But then they just kind of ignore that storyline.
Yeah, the entire plotline with the little girl, her parents, and her rescuer was just.... completely and utterly pointless. It had nothing to do with anything, didn't drive the plot forward at all (it didn't like... put her husband in a different place or anything), and was thoroughly dropped like a hot potato. It was a waste of time.
What multiverse was 10 Cloverfield Lane in? Are they in alternate Howard's bunker? The possibilities are endless. I love the ambiguity.
Comments
Come on, Cliff. I saw the movie the moment it came out; the "hivemind internet culture" was MEGA FUCKING EXCITED and the hype train was in high gear. I went into it with starry eyes and I hated it.
Don't discredit people's opinions just because you think they're part of the "hive mind"
I didn't say you Brian. The entire internet hates it, and I am not sure why? It seems like a reasonably decent film to me. Look, there is this culture of hype and instant opinion without digestion. This movie was damned by critics less than a day after release and I am being sincere, I thought it was pretty good I mean not Blade Runner good, but a serviceable decent sci fi horror film. It almost seemed to me that the sub story was... Well Paramount was not that high on it so they dumped it on Netflix... which to me may have colored the critical perceptions.
http://www.indiewire.com/2017/06/rotten-tomatoes-film-critics-transformers-1201845002/
The entire internet hates it for a good reason. It was the worst parts of Gravity mixed with Final Destination and some random humor sprinkled on top for no apparent reason other than Chris O'Dowd not being able to act.
I wouldn't have paid to see it in theaters, but seeing it on Netflix wasn't a total waste of my time. I was entertained, but it wasn't as good as the other two movies at all.
I'm not sure I see the correlation to Gravity? Gravity wasn't a science fiction film, it was a character study survival story with science fiction elements. I can't see how they relate that closely. Sure it was in space, a lot of films use that setting (because space is awesome). Final Destination I just don't know because I have never bothered to watch one of those.
I think it probably borrowed more from Alien and Event Horizon. And to @primesuspect point, if this isn't in the Half Life universe, they certainly borrowed inspiration from it. For me, the original is the weakest film of the three. Hud is there, obviously a nod to gaming culture, carrying the Blair Witch camera and the whole time you are thinking... Man, could something eat Hud already?? 10 Cloverfield Lane is incredible. Paradox is good. I like how they are crafting the universe. I hope the perceived failure of the current film does not kill the franchise. It's imperfect but it has a load of potential.
Look, I'm not saying Paradox is a superlative instant classic of a film. As a science fiction movie though, it's not bad, in fact it's pretty good. It has a neat premise that creates a serious moral and ethical dilemma for the main character. That alone made the narrative interesting for me. Also the attempts at humor were not so bad (I admit, not that great either). I've been in situations stressful enough that joking is a way to deflect some negative emotion, it's a fairly natural human defense mechanism. Not everyone screams and cries, some people tell terrible jokes to cope. That's how I saw the character, it's his stress response, he jokes, poorly....
I just think the internet is mean sometimes. It's like people love to kick something in the teeth, and if they see enough people kicking it in the teeth they figure, okay, here is an acceptable target for me to get this frustration out of me. The world needs fight club for real. The Cloverfield Paradox shouldn't be the target of anyone's ire.
I don't see how it created a paradox. A both dimensions already exist along side each other. Why does a lot of energy make that any worse? Maybe it's my bad understanding of quantum theory.
After that the ship just tries to actively kill them? Teleporting worms and crewmen sure, you literally moved to another existence. But why the wall eating arms? Is the ship now alive?
Also I'm assuming this is the future. I'm which case when they come back "now" says they returned. But if they came back to "now" then what fell near New York 7 years ago? Did the monster and them split times from a single event? If they both fell 7 years ago, then how did they detect them returning "now"? If this isn't the future then why is New York not also suffering from oil shortages, unless i missed that comment in the original film.
Random side note as well. When the dude rescues the little girl and takes her back to what appears to be a bunker, anyone else notice her face looking around like "ah shit, this guy is a weirdo, I'm not in a good place right more". But then they just kind of ignore that storyline.
Yeah, the entire plotline with the little girl, her parents, and her rescuer was just.... completely and utterly pointless. It had nothing to do with anything, didn't drive the plot forward at all (it didn't like... put her husband in a different place or anything), and was thoroughly dropped like a hot potato. It was a waste of time.
What multiverse was 10 Cloverfield Lane in? Are they in alternate Howard's bunker? The possibilities are endless. I love the ambiguity.
I assume that Cliff is a giant troll, 100% of the time
Depends on what version of me you are talking to. All versions of Cliff are always right though. That remains consistent across dimensions.
Who was this then?
@Canti you’re going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.