The story links to BoxOfficeMojo.com who is reporting that Cloverfield has stomped the competition and was #1 on Friday:1. CLOVERFIELD - $16,750,000
2. 27 DRESSES - $7,650,000
3. THE BUCKET LIST - $4,150,000
4. JUNO - $3,060,000
5. MAD MONEY - $2,300,000
Cloverfield made almost as much as the other top-5 combined!
Slashfilm is reporting that Cloverfield should "easily coast to ... the All-Time January 3-Day record and ... set a new record for the long [MLK holiday] weekend with an estimated $52M."
The exec(s) you thought it would be a great idea that 27 Dresses should be moved up to 1-18-08 should be fired!
ReplyDeletehopefully im going to see it tonight with a friend..cant wait
ReplyDeleteSince we know the first weekend is going to be a big hit, I'm curious how the follow-up business is going to be. I'm not sure why, but this movie sparked more dislike in some people than I ever remember. I loved it, but people who didn't like it just seem to be furious about it. Either it's because of the marketing approach, or we've reached a point where making a popular science fiction movie is just impossible because of the level of fanboyism in the world (with the internet multiplying the effects). If the movie continues to succeed despite the complaining, I guess we've learned that no matter how much a handful of people complain on the internet, they're still just a handful of people (no matter how important they think they are).
ReplyDeleteok sorry to burst ur guy's bubble but look at yahoo.com and it gives info on the movie like the movie might not be made into a sequal and if it is it will be about the same monster atack and yes i know this has nothing to do with the thread
ReplyDeleteFrankly, dustid, I think another movie about the same night, but from a different persepctive would be great.
ReplyDeletePerhaps from the perspective of a military photographer. That would answer questions about what the monster's weaknesses are, why its called Cloverfield, and perhaps some info about the bites.
I think it could be a SERIES of great films, all on the same night.
I say more dislike wasn't from the perspective of those that kept up with the Cloverfield mythology. I think they pretty much loved it.
ReplyDeleteI think it was more of the "hey, cool commercial, go see it" who went to see it. My cousin and I were talking about this last night. It's PG-13 for a bigger draw. I saw families in line. As my cousin said the "Disney syndrome" took affect at the end. People expected them to escape or some type of concluding ending. These are the type that make numb, dumb action films number 1. They didn't care about the real story which wasn't the monster, but the love aspect and how much you are willing to do for someone you care. The monster was pretty much the back drop of it.
I just saw the thing Reeves said about a second perspective. It's an interesting idea, however I'm not sure you could draw a large audience for a story they've already told, just doing it from a different POV. To my knowledge, no one's ever done that before. If they tried it, it would have to go well beyond the ending because most of the people who'd go are the ones who liked this one, but want more (still a large group, but you're talking about a percentage of a percentage). I can't imagine you'd make as much the second time around with the same events of the first movie (and it would cost a lot to do this in a traditional monster movie style).
ReplyDeletesaw this movie with my dad today and i thought it was amazing. it was actually a little better than i thought it would be. anything i should look for when i see it again in 2 hours and 55 minutes?
ReplyDelete/sidenote. man did anyone else see how awesome that bullet that marlena put down robs shirt was? that was some cool stuff it did.
(if you dont know what thats about consider youself lucky)
Inx said...
ReplyDeleteI think it could be a SERIES of great films, all on the same night.
THIS. With random cameos of the characters from other movies, all somehow interconnected, like LOST.
If they make a sequel (which would be awesome), they'd definitely have to give it a spiffy new name, i.e., not Cloverfield 2, or Cloverfield: Reflection or the like.
ReplyDeleteAnd I agree that most folks who were following up on the story online were most likely NOT the ones to be whining at the end. Instead, they were the folks who said, "lol Jaimie," and, "Hah! Hud, you comic book geek!"
It's basically the kind of movie for folks who like puzzles, not for folks who like their story lines upfront, without any "brain overload."
Agreed. The people who hated it need their stories all tied up in nice little bows at the end.
ReplyDeleteMy boyfriend and I have been discussing this. Most people don't seem to even recognize that this movie is so much more like real life because the ending is NOT tied up in a neat little bow. We all walk around knowing a fractional part of what there is to know, because we're limited, subjective creatures. This movie recognized that, and I think it infuriates some people because they are under the profound misimpression that we as subjective, limited human beings know and understand far more about this world than we really do.
Here's an example: my mom died in August of 2007. I don't know if the movement and faces she made when I finally got to the hospital means she knew I was there. I don't really know what she died of. And in the end, I don't know what happened to the essence of my mom. That's real. That's life. Those questions can never be answered, just like questions about MGP cannot be answered in a movie about trying to surive the attack.
I suppose those questions could have been answered like the Area 51 scene in Independence Day, but that would have been formulaic as hell, and not a movie I would have been super excited to see in the theater.
Saw it today. There were about 7 people including me and my friend, but it was lunch time, so make of that what you will. It will be interesting to see today's results. As long as it makes a profit, I'm happy.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I'm against the idea, J.J. could be thinking TV series. I agree that multiple perspectives of the same night is an awesome idea, I just don't know how well it would do at the box office, but I also think a TV series would be a lost cause as well.
ReplyDeleteMonster design = terrible
ReplyDeleteidea of copy-pasting a cinematography 'technique' that was abysmal back when it was actually considered original = terrible
Depending absolutely all of the 'buzz' concerning the movie around an ARG that ultimately provided absolutely no improved connection to the movie's content itself anyway, thereby wasting six months of everybody's time = terrible
The insinuation that the movie itself is just some 90-minute advertisement within the viral marketing for the supposedly REAL movie = terrible
I can live with them providing little to no answers about the monster's origins within the movie if it stood alone; it'd be nice to know where it came from but really it dosen't matter that much. I'm really getting sick of them thinking they can *still* dangle the carrot, though. Six-odd months in and they still insist on skirting around anything ressembling an answer. It's becoming less 'we want to keep people hooked' or 'we want to reward the people who are actually FOLLOWING this thing' and more 'we need to find a way to make people oblivious to the fact we haven't come up with any good ideas'.
Monster design = Subjective
ReplyDeleteshaky cam = abysmal = subjective
Sorry a man in a white lab coat didn't step out of the shadows to explain everything to you, and I'm sorry you actual expected a clear answer, ever, from JJ Abrams. We have been given enough to have a vague outline and that's enough.
That's why this is actually a good movie. It's ordinary citizens just trying to survive.
Well said ty, very well said
ReplyDeleteI kind of am in agreement that the monster design misses the mark. JJ said he wanted an iconic monster, similar to Godzilla. MGP (I love that nickname) is not cool looking or something that my 7 year-old would want to play with (not that I'd let her see the movie in the first place). He's alien, slightly gross, and not aesthetically pleasing in any way that I can imagine. Add to that the fact that he eats people (Godzilla ignored us, Gamera protected us, and King Kong wanted to mate with some of us) and you have something that is more akin to the monster from Alien, which you don't see a lot of kids having toys of on their desks. I don't think it's bad or wrong, but it's not what JJ said he was shooting for. Toss in the things we don't know as of yet (possibly ever) and this becomes closer to The Mist, which might be cool, but isn't going to be spawning huge sales at Toys R Us.
ReplyDeletes, I think you misunderstand. The toy ,or sculpture as I'm sure some would prefer, isn't for kids. It's for the type of people who bought the mcfarlane movie monster sets, ect.
ReplyDeleteJJ only compared us having our monster like japan to godzilla for iconic purposes, not personality type.
Another story about Cloverfield's box office and the records it broke...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20172806,00.html
I loved the movie, loved the very idea of it, and I think the most innovative idea is that the audience is not privy to any more information than the characters are. I liked that the military was not portrayed as all-knowing, or super secretive. They were a force brought in to take something out, our formerly blurred out army guy told Rob what he knew and helped them out. I loved the ending, and I like the idea that the story can continue even if just online.
Speaking of blurred-out guy, at least now we know why he was blurred out. He was part of special ops in charge of treating and evacuating the personnel. Then he told Rob the plan, including the impending large-scale bombing of Manhattan (I still don't believe it was a nuke, I think it was just a very large bomb) and let them go against orders. If he survived, I'd say he's in trouble.
ReplyDeleteCLOVERFIELD IS NOW ON THE INTERNET!!! TO WATCH FOLLOW LINK!!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.free-tv-video-online.info/player/divx.php?id=2106321
Matthew hit the mark - this movie had nothing at all to do with the viral marketing campaign that accompanied it. Who is Jamie and why the hell does she matter? Oh, right, she doesn't. Some fanboys can go gaga over this whole movie does not equal backstory bs, but I personally was hoping for at least a vauge connetion between slusho, or that undersea food stuff, or whatnot.
ReplyDeleteIf I hadn't seen the movie I'd know just as much about "Cloverfield" as I do now. Yeah, the graphics were the best I've seen and I thought the monster was cool, but what a waste of 20 bucks (and hours of my time) for what turned out to be just your typical action/horror flick.
Just in for support of Matthew/jeffbridges' gripes. I feel ripped off and disappointed that the complete lack of cohesion between the ARG and the film. It's a shame I couldn't have seen the film with no expectation of tie-ins, but as things are I was terribly let down.
ReplyDeleteagain with the expectation of tie in. If you didn't like the movie for itself that's perfectly fine, but JJ told everyone nothing viral related would be in the movie, so it's kind of silly to say you feel ripped off when you were warned in advance.
ReplyDeletekudostothe movie :) the actress who played jamie who is she? lol
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete