• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Cloverfield Spoiler Thread

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
ya that's at the end of the movie at the end of the credits... but it's not really a spoiler. It's not even said backwards. You hear "Help us..."

EDIT: blah nm. After the credits, we heard it, but we went "wtf did he just say?!"

We went home right after the movie, and it was unanimous that what was said was "it's still alive."

So I stuck with that, and now I hear that it's just "help us."

that's it. just... help us. nothing else, nothing more.


EDIT2: errmmm... fvck i have no idea. to me, it really didn't sound like "help us," since it really sounded like he said something more. Maybe he really said "It's still alive," and played backwards, it says "help us."

blah.

EDIT3:
Interesting information gathered from viral websites leading up to the movie. Apparently, if one was savvy enough and brought all the clues together from all those myspace sites of the characters, each character's personal websites, and all those other sites, then you can assume what this website has assumed:
http://www.cloverfieldendingcredits.com/
 
Couldn't tell what it said at the end of the credits, but listening to the OP's link with headphones All I can hear for certain is "its still alive".

Sequel anyone?
 
Originally posted by: SpiderX
Sorry if this has been answered already. Has anyone checked out the pics on 1-18-08.com? If you flip over one of the pictures there is a bunch of japanese writing on it. Anyone know what it says?
Click to expand...

I can in no way read it, but it looked like a recipe to me at first glance.
 
Finally saw, very good movie! An interesting and refreshing angle on the old Monster attacks City theme. Which brings about the only major "Plot hole" in the movie: Not once did a character mention Godzilla, King Kong, or other obvious comparative and descriptive creature. I can live with that though.😀
 
Originally posted by: randay
Originally posted by: Modeps
Originally posted by: Captante
There were numerous plot-holes & errors but since I go to movies to be entertained not nit-pick that wasn't a problem. Also I thought the first-person perspective was what made the movie unique & I really started to feel like I was living the experience instead of watching it.
Click to expand...

I'm just curious as to what you thought these 'plot holes' were or what errors occurred. A monster attacked the city, the dude went to go find is girl, they all died. The End. Not much to it in terms of plot...
Click to expand...

Im not sure but i think one was when they were walking through the tunnels. I think someone said it would have took them forever so it might have been much longer in real life.

personally I dont understand how any organic creature can survive missiles and bombs and what not.
Click to expand...

That's not much of a plot hole... just perhaps an inconsistency from real life, which this is not.

Also, you can't say that this creature wouldn't be able to survive these attacks, because its not real. It can do whatever the creators say it can do.
 
It was the top gossing film for a January release ever so I am willing to bet 99% there will be a sequel. And the plots are endless really - another camera with a different perspective? Another city where the monster attacks? Back story of a government lab where they are working on mutation? A oil rig which finds some mysterious goo?

I just hope whatever the sequel is they don't use that crappy shaky cam thing.
 
The premise of this movie is clear, some monster attacks nyc, blah.. blah.. been done 100x already. the movie was filmed with a camcorder, most of it was at night and very hard to see.

It focuses around a group of 4 or 5 people who try to outrun it. The camera shaked so much, i couldn't tell what the heck was going on.

Folks on imdb gave it 8.0/10.0, i would give it a 2.0.. weak plot and even weaker actors. If you like crappy movies, this is for you. This will wind up in the walmart bargin bin soon enough with the rest of the junk.

 
If the nectar is what supposedly made the monster grow to huge proportions, does that mean that the humans who have been steadily ingesting Slusho are going to grow into giant people?
 
Originally posted by: Farley2k
It was the top gossing film for a January release ever so I am willing to bet 99% there will be a sequel. And the plots are endless really - another camera with a different perspective? Another city where the monster attacks? Back story of a government lab where they are working on mutation? A oil rig which finds some mysterious goo?

I just hope whatever the sequel is they don't use that crappy shaky cam thing.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I'm not sure a sequel done the same way just with different people will fly. Seems to me it wouldn't really be a monster movie then, just an Action/Drama with the monster as a backdrop. That said, I think any sequel will be a risk. Personally, I wouldn't mind a sequel done in a more traditional giant monster style, but obviously that would be so different that it's probably a bigger risk than making it the same as this one.
 
Originally posted by: ActiveX
The premise of this movie is clear, some monster attacks nyc, blah.. blah.. been done 100x already. the movie was filmed with a camcorder, most of it was at night and very hard to see.

It focuses around a group of 4 or 5 people who try to outrun it. The camera shaked so much, i couldn't tell what the heck was going on.

Folks on imdb gave it 8.0/10.0, i would give it a 2.0.. weak plot and even weaker actors. If you like crappy movies, this is for you. This will wind up in the walmart bargin bin soon enough with the rest of the junk.
Click to expand...

Totally disagree. This is nothing like any other Monster vs City movie made. Sure, it's Monster vs City, but if you want to stretch things to that extent, every single movie idea has been done 100x.
 
Agonizing

thats the best way i can describe it. maybe i was sitting too close. I am not photosensitive at all, but i had to look down and close my eyes every ten minutes because my head hurt so bad. My girlfriend became very nauseous about half way through. The acting was good...thats about all i can give it. The creature looked ridiculous, wasn't frightening at all...i think i actually laughed the first time i saw the whole thing. I didn't find it even the least bit entertaining.

+0.02$
 
Great movie, loved the plot holes because no one knew what it was. I liked the home movie camcorder action too, shaky cam and all.
 
just saw it.

wtf? it's only 73min loing.

also, what camcorder has a battery charge of 7hrs?!?!?!

and where's the scene of f18's launching missles into that thing? i saw the b2 bomber then the monster being nailed by bombs.

but there was suppose to be a scene of f18's also launching it's missles, and hitting. what happened to that scene?
 
Originally posted by: JEDI
just saw it.

wtf? it's only 73min loing.

also, what camcorder has a battery charge of 7hrs?!?!?!

and where's the scene of f18's launching missles into that thing? i saw the b2 bomber then the monster being nailed by bombs.

but there was suppose to be a scene of f18's also launching it's missles, and hitting. what happened to that scene?
Click to expand...

*Boom*?
 
Originally posted by: JEDI

wtf? it's only 73min loing.

also, what camcorder has a battery charge of 7hrs?!?!?!
Click to expand...

This has already been dicussed. As you said the movie was only 73 minutes, and all footage is supposed to be from the camera uncut. So while what was taped spanned across 7 hours, it was only on for 73 minutes of recording, which is feasible for a battery.
 
Originally posted by: JEDI
just saw it.

wtf? it's only 73min loing.

also, what camcorder has a battery charge of 7hrs?!?!?!

and where's the scene of f18's launching missles into that thing? i saw the b2 bomber then the monster being nailed by bombs.

but there was suppose to be a scene of f18's also launching it's missles, and hitting. what happened to that scene?
Click to expand...

It doesnt, the movie is only 73min loing.
 
damn you people for posting the back story😛

i was expecting something cool, but nectar? nectar?!

any pics of the last scene...I too was focusing on the chick😱
 
Originally posted by: TheNewbie
THIS may be a SPOILER (ok you've got your warning), can anyone confirm or deny?
I obviously still haven't watched the movie... *fucking "Stumble!" plug-in*

This message as well as the next two were merged from another "Cloverfield Spoiler" thread.
moderator allisolm
Click to expand...

that's crazy

go there again, and do this.. don't look at the screen, and before you watch, imagine the first time it's going to say 'it's still alive', and second time it says 'help up'. It's not being played backwards at all, both times, it's say the same thing. They way it was said? or encoded in the first place, had the sound of both at the same time. It could have been merely said one way, but somehow can sound like both if your mind is preconditioned to hear either or both? I've heard people say all they heard was static?! (at the end of the credits in the theater, not that audio byte on the ytmnd page... don't know yet, I'm going to test this theory tomorrow with that though, with my parents) But it could be that the encoding of the track - used for the film - had been done with two distinct voices, and possible a third byte of static, into a single multichannel file, or even layered them together too. You could hear whichever you want to hear. Some people are going to be more naturally inclined to hear a distinct one, and that means some are gonna get spread by word of mouth (the whole way the movie did in the first place, with everything being viral and very, very controlled). Funny that it's like that though.
 
Originally posted by: JEDI
why is the movie called Cloverfield, besides the military naming ground zero?
Click to expand...

because the military designated either the case file or renamed the actual geographical area of Central Park to Cloverfield (both are hinted at on the case file description page, that is displayed at the beginning of the movie. The movie is about the presentation of this case file, and not anything else. So why not name the movie after the case file it is presenting?
 
from Wikipedia:

The film was titled Cloverfield from the beginning, but the title changed throughout production before it was finalized as the original title. Matt Reeves explained that the title was changed frequently due to the hype caused by the teaser trailer, "That excitement spread to such a degree that we suddenly couldn't use the name anymore. So we started using all these names like Slusho and Cheese.[14] And people always found out what we were doing!" The director said that "Cloverfield" was the government's case designate for the monster, comparing the titling to that of the Manhattan Project. "And it's not a project per se. It's the way that this case has been designated. That's why that is on the trailer, and it becomes clearer in the film. It's how they refer to this phenomenon [or] this case," said the director.[15] The film's final title, "Cloverfield", is the name of the exit Abrams takes to his Santa Monica office
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top