To anyone who saw "Cloverfield"-CAUTION SOME SPOILERS!!

[freethought]

Greetings fellow DUers!! I saw "Cloverfield" when it came out in the theaters and I liked it. Well, my sister had not seen it yet so, being the good brother I am I rented it.

This time around though we watched the movie on a PC. Such that we could freeze scenes and try to get a good look at the monster and those freaky things that fell off of it.

I was wondering if anyone saw something in the very last scene. It was of the guy and his girlfriend having a good time on Coney Island. The video is panning out across the water and in the right half of the screen you see an object fall from the sky and hit the water. I totally missed this when the film was out in the theaters. It was way out in the background.

Did anyone else catch the same thing?

[Forkboy]

1. Yep, I caught that.

Here's an image of the parasites that was never in the movie...but it's tantalizing when put together with other clues.



I've read an interview with J.J. Abrams that said the creature was still just a baby, and it had been sleeping underwater for thousands of years. He hinted that the object seen crashing into the ocean was a satellite, and the recovery of that satellite is what woke the creature up.

Now, if you look at that image it kind of looks like the parasites are underwater in the lights of some kind of submersible, which would support the hints Abrams gave.

What isn't made clear is whether those parasites were from the creature, or brought back on the crashing satellite. At the start of the movie we see the term "Codename Designate:Cloverfield" which suggests to me that the government was aware of something before the attack began.

Part of the trouble with the decision they went with to use just a handheld camcorder effect was that it didn't allow them to jump to other characters and give any kind of backstory, as jumping from the camcorder effect to a regular camera would just pull viewer out of each portion of the film. What it did allow them to do was to give a more intimate, "you are there" feel, as well as give them an excuse to avoid big, expensive effects shots, which on their small budget of 22 million had to be kept to a minimum (Though there are a few great shots. The scene where the creature is getting bombed as the people escape is a highly complex, and most likely expensive, FX shot).

Also, at the end of the credits you can hear voices saying "help us". When the sequence is played in reverse it says, "It's still alive."

There's also some neat images hidden in single frames of the movie. While playing it goes by so fast no one would notice, but when one freezes each frame you get this..

King Kong


The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms


Like Abrams tv show Lost, Cloverfield gives us more questions than it answers, which convienently makes us want more. And considering the movie made 47 million in it's opening weekend you can rest assured there will be a sequel. In fact, there's already rumors online as to that...

...and that's MY tease. ;)

[dubeskin]

2. I really didn't like it

I caught the last scene. But I don't plan on seeing the sequel.

Let me start by saying that I'm a huge fan of Lost, and so I expected to really like Cloverfield. Yet I was extremely disappointed. I felt that the party part lasted too long(something like 20 minutes) and that the real action was too short. The party was meant to give some background on the characters, yet the only person I felt for was Hud(I think that was his name) when he died. I felt that the shaky camera thing got old really fast and was distracting throughout the movie. I thought the monster was well done, and would have liked to see more of it instead of the brief shots we DID catch of it. The ending was terrible and disappointing, how it just goes to black and then the credits, even if it WAS the only way they could have done it. Likewise, I thought that overall it wasn't highly entertaining. I expected a thrill ride, especially with all the hype built up over it, and yet I was let down with a little kiddie coaster.

[XemaSab]

3. I had a slightly opposite reaction

I thought it would have been a freakier movie if you never really got a look at the thing. :shrug:

It's too bad it came out so close to "I Am Legend," 'cause the urge to compare the two is definitely there, and "Cloverfield" just is not that great of a movie.

[El Fuego]

4. I read about the last scene and looked for it.

Otherwise I would have missed it. According to the Cloverfield article in Wikipedia:

The film cuts to Rob and Beth's Coney Island date, during which a distant object can be seen falling from the sky into the ocean accompanied by a faint noise similar to that heard when the monster first arrives.After the credits roll, a garbled radio sound clip can be heard. When played backwards, the audio says, "It's still alive".

About the monster -- What the hell was that thang?!? Apparently It Came From Outer Space, according to last scene.

I thought it was a great movie. I enjoyed much more than I anticipated. The comparisons to Blair Witch are way off base. Blair Witch was a low budget movie that looked like one. "Cloverfield" has the look of a low budget film with the shaky hand-held camera work, but in reality it's a HUGE budget film. Pretty clever!

I give it :thumbsup:

[redqueen]

5. I didn't catch it, no...

Thanks for mentioning it. :)

[Carnea]

6. Nope missed it completely

Wow....

I liked the movie a lot (no surprise there big Godzilla fan here)

But my girl also liked it and she hates shaky cam films. (She couldn't stand that last Bourne film for example)