Ok, how about 51% on RT?
Spoilers The Cloverfield Paradox
- Thread starter M'rk son of Mogh
- Start date
Ok, how about 51% on RT?
So you agree with these ratings or disagree?
They tell me whether or not I am supposed to like something. For example, if I like some movie with a very low rating on both RT and IMDB, I wouldn't go spouting about how great the movie is on the internet. That would be trolling.
I enjoyed it, but it wasn't anything special, especially on a science-fiction level. Some of the dialogue was been meh, but most of the cast rose above it. The story was straight forward and the science was iffy (but at least no one said "God Particle").
More importantly, I actually liked the characters (even if Hamilton, the so-called lead, was largely in the background for most of the film), which is something I *cannot* say about the original Cloverfield, and for that reason alone, I like Paradox a lot more than the original.
That said, 10 Cloverfield Lane is still easily the best of the three.
More importantly, I actually liked the characters (even if Hamilton, the so-called lead, was largely in the background for most of the film), which is something I *cannot* say about the original Cloverfield, and for that reason alone, I like Paradox a lot more than the original.
That said, 10 Cloverfield Lane is still easily the best of the three.
While I don't mostly disagree with Ignatiy's review, he really needs to get his facts straight: Abrams only produced and only had direct involvement with the film during reshoots.
Abrams gets treated as the starting quarterback by people who don't know his level of involvement, even if he's sitting on the bench in street clothes. A lot of TV shows with his name on it, he's only helping friends get their shows made and has no actual creative involvement, yet he'll still get blamed for anything that goes wrong.
Why, it's almost as if putting your name on something implies some kind of ownership, or even collaboration.
You see the monster several times.
(click to enlarge)
I mean consistently. I know a big complaint I've seen by a lot of people about the original is the monster doesn't get enough screen time. I guess I should have been clearer (since I know you see a bit of it, just not enough).
Not that it matters. I was just saying you don't need to see the film, and I never bothered because of the combination of lack of monster stuff, no answers about the monster, and the POV style. So, I just wanted people to know that its totally possible to watch the new movie even if you didn't see the first one.
Weird, the most common complaint I've seen about the original is that you see too much of the monster
Take it easy. There's no reason to go that route when replying. to someone here.
Yeah, I am right here. No need to talk about me to others.
I really enjoyed this. A pleasant surprise from Mr Mystery Box. 
Comments to PM please
It's a direct to dvd quality movie that got a Cloverfield sticker slapped on it, duped Netflix, and received a huge paycheck. It got the right amount of attention for what it is.
They should make a Rom-Com, throw the monster on a newscast in the background, and call it First Date in Cloverfield.
