CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

**AnalogRocks** · Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 4:10 pm Post subject:

I just ask one of my firends. If he hate's it I know I'll love it.

Phil Smith · Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 7717

Well my comment wasn't about critics. It was about Kal choosing movies based pic and sound quality, with movie QUALITY nothing but an afterthought. Nothing wrong with that. I only noticed it because it's 180 degrees opposite of how I pick a movie.

Rotten Tomatoes is solely how I make my movie selections. How else do you decide? By what you here on TV? That's mostly critics that are involved in the RT rating, except RT is an average of many critic's opinions. Much better than depending on what one or two critics think. By what friends suggest? I was talking to friend on the phone the other day. Knowing that I'm a movie buff, he recommended some movies he had recently seen. Now he's a very smart guy, but his taste in movies isn't very refined, to say the least. By cover art? Some REALLY bad movies have some very nice covers. For me, Rotten Tomatoes has taken much of the guesswork out renting or buying a movie. I also watch a lot of good independent films that I wouldn't even know existed if it wasn't for RT.

PS: Steve, I liked Serenity. For that type of movie (not my favorite), I thought it was VERY good. I'll give "The Number 23" a try since you liked it. I'll be sending you a bill for the rental fee if it sucks! Wink

WanMan · Joined: 19 Mar 2006 Posts: 10270

So, I finally watched this movie on the tele. My first thought this evening was a flashback to a literature class I took in college, called Modern Science Fiction Literature. The instructor chatted in the first week about the origin of some science themes, like Godzilla. He related that Godzilla was the result of how Japanese felt about America toward the ending of WWII (big bad monster destroying Tokyo). Who would have thought that only a handful of years following 9/11 that American culture would do a Japan:Godzilla.

So, I watched the movie, with the bazillion commercial interruptions and concluded I was a bit amused by the antagonist and how the monster reminded me of the monsters in Half-Life (FPS game). So, there was the updated form of an old movie, repackaged for the youth of American audiences. And I concluded that while more could have been done from a non-camcorder 1st person perspective, it was very predictable.

I felt good all over (sarcasm) after watching this, but I felt better that I had not bought this movie--and wished I could have said the same for District-9. And not there is a sequel to Cloverfield coming?

huggy · Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:31 pm Post subject:

Shaky cam was the deal breaker for me. I get a headache thinking about that movie Rolling Eyes

Dave

**AnalogRocks** · Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:36 pm Post subject:

This was an utterly forgettable movie. I hate shti shot on video cams ( 28 days latter anyone? )

huggy · Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2010 6:00 am Post subject:

WanMan · Joined: 19 Mar 2006 Posts: 10270

The sequel should be called Clover Witch Project, or Cloverfield Horror.

**AnalogRocks** · Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2010 5:16 pm Post subject:

WanMan · Joined: 19 Mar 2006 Posts: 10270

Well, while the move suggested that carpet bombing would commence, no one actually mentioned using a nuke. As such, there were two other kinds of monsters (or sizes of the same monster), and I'm not seeing where they were going to be able to contain lower/middle sections of Manhattan from movement north by these things.

Also, didn't the thing come out of the water, or at least swam/waded through it? Maybe they can blame this of Jersey.