Cloverfield

[MacGuffin]

'Cloverfield' hits some viewers in the gut
Horror film with herky-jerky scenes nauseates some. One theater chain posts warning signs.
By Rong-Gong Lin II, Los Angeles Times

Thousands of Southern Californians were no doubt clutching their seats while watching "Cloverfield," last weekend's No. 1 movie at the box office. At least a few of them were clutching their stomachs as well.

Since the movie opened last Friday, some patrons said they experienced nausea and dizziness while watching the horror flick, much of which was filmed with a herky-jerky, hand-held cameras.

Erika Hasegawa, 32, was watching "Cloverfield" at a theater in Alhambra on Tuesday night but had to leave in the middle of the film.

"I'm really nauseous right now -- just hold on for a second," she said, before walking down the hall and retching into a trash can.

"I wish I could get my money back," she said.

It is unclear how many people felt ill while watching the movie, which follows a group of young hipsters filming themselves with a camcorder as they flee a reptilian monster that is destroying New York City. The movie set box office records on its holiday weekend opening, earning about $46 million.

Reports of illness while watching "Cloverfield" popped up on Internet bulletin boards over the weekend, with some posters writing that they had to leave a few minutes into the movie. Others said they tried to stare at a wall as the movie continued. One Internet poster reported vomiting several times.

A call to Paramount Pictures, which released the movie, was not returned.

Executives at some movie chains stressed that the vast majority of viewers felt fine.

Nonetheless, AMC Theatres, which is based in Kansas City, Mo., placed caution signs in hundreds of its theaters nationwide warning about possible motion sickness.

Mann Theatres Chief Executive Peter Dobson said there were three reports of illness at Mann theaters in Los Angeles over the weekend and one in Glendale.

"I must confess I was a little surprised, but sometimes from time to time this happens," Dobson said. "It's not normal to get four in a weekend."

Some experts were not surprised, given the film's use of hand-held cameras that were shaken to boost suspense.

It is a technique that has been used in other movies -- notably the "Blair Witch Project," a 1999 film that also prompted viewer complaints about nausea and vomiting. It also involved young adults filming themselves with camcorders while trying to escape a mysterious, terrifying force.

The problem may be more pronounced at theaters with bigger screens. The larger the screen, the harder for the viewer to keep a visual frame of reference, said John Risey, an audiologist at the Ochsner Clinic in New Orleans.

"To your brain, it does appear that the entire world is moving," Risey said.

That's not an issue when viewing the same film on a small TV screen, he said.

"What makes you dizzy is that the visual environment is moving beside you and yet you are still," Risey said.

The brain becomes confused, he said, and can trigger reactions in other parts of the brain that cause nausea and vomiting.

What the eyes process visually has enormous effect on how the body reacts, said Dr. Dennis Maceri, an associate professor at the USC School of Medicine who specializes in ear, nose and throat care. The body reacts to what is seen, he said, even if it's not real.

In the 1968 Steve McQueen movie "Bullitt," viewers watch a car chase on the steep hills of San Francisco.

"He goes down the big hill, and you can feel your stomach move . . . even though your body is stationary," Maceri said.

"The eyes can fool you," he said.

Some people experience a similar feeling as they read in a moving car, he said. To the eyes, the words appear to jump around and "you can't stabilize your gaze."

Experts suggest that those who feel motion sickness should stare at a fixed point that appears not to move, such as the head of someone in the theater, Risey said.

Dramamine, an anti-motion-sickness medication, also might help, he said.

Peter Bohlen, an 18-year-old high school student from Glendale, said he was nauseated after watching the movie Saturday with four friends, and still wasn't feeling well a day later.

"They're trying to go for the home video feel, so it's constantly shaking around," Bohlen said. "My brain tried to make it work, but it couldn't. I got a pretty heinous headache afterward."

Roxanne Garrett, 18, of Alhambra said she was feeling dizzy at first.

"But I got used to it," she said.

Scott Correll, 38, of South Pasadena said the jerky motion of the camera is a filming style that has become popular in recent years.

"It's stimulus overload, and you get used to it," Correll said. "It's the way everything is these days."

Dobson, the chief executive of Mann Theatres, said he believed that the vast majority of viewers felt fine.

"We've shown it to thousands of people this weekend, so the actual percentage of people [who felt ill] is really low," Dobson said. "We're delighted with the business 'Cloverfield' is doing."

[grand theft sparrow]

MINOR SPOILERS

Erika Hasegawa, 32, was watching "Cloverfield" at a theater in Alhambra on Tuesday night but had to leave in the middle of the film.

"I'm really nauseous right now -- just hold on for a second," she said, before walking down the hall and retching into a trash can.

"I wish I could get my money back," she said.

Screw these people.  I left the movie with a headache, feeling like I was gonna puke and you know what?  I wouldn't change it because if a monster really did come out of the ocean and lay waste to half the city as I tried to rescue my would-be girlfriend from the top of the toppled-over Time Warner Center, I'd probably have a headache and feel like I was gonna puke.  I couldn't have asked for a more immersive filmgoing experience.

[MacGuffin]

Paramount sows 'Cloverfield' sequel
Matt Reeves to direct 'Invisible Woman'
Source: Variety

Matt Reeves is in early talks with Paramount to direct a "Cloverfield" sequel, and he has also made a deal with GreeneStreet Films to direct "The Invisible Woman."

Timing of the projects will depend on how quickly Paramount can complete discussions with Reeves, producer J.J. Abrams and scribe Drew Goddard to scare up another monster tale for the "Cloverfield" sequel. There's a good chance the sequel will be Reeves' next film, in which case he will direct "The Invisible Woman" afterward.

"Woman" is a Hitchcock-style thriller that probes the mind of a former beauty queen who turns to a life of crime to protect her family.

Reeves wrote the script and will produce with Abrams and GreeneStreet's John Penotti, Fisher Stevens and Tim Williams.

"Matt has created a truly original and compelling character and story," said GreeneStreet's Penotti.

GreeneStreet will finance "The Invisible Woman," and GreeneStreet Intl. will sell overseas territories.

With a $25 million budget, a strong concept and cast of unknowns, "Cloverfield" scored a $46 million opening frame, which was a record for a Martin Luther King Jr. holiday weekend. Paramount gave away almost no first-dollar gross, making the film a bargain for the studio.

GreeneStreet recently completed two films: the John Polson-directed "Tenderness," starring Russell Crowe, which was just set for distribution at Lionsgate, and "Bill," directed by Melisa Wallack and Bernie Goldmann, whichwill be distributed by First Look Studios.

[Alexandro]

Last friday I received some terrible, terrible news. The sadness I've been having since that day is overwhelming. I was resolved to go to the movies that night since I haven't done that in months. I was about to check The Orphanate, but I get a vibe from that movie that it's gonna be really good and classe but also terribly sad, and I just wasn't in the mood. So I went to see Cloverfield cause I figured it wold be the kind of movie that makes you forget about the outside world completely. And it did.

I will never forget how this film inmersed me into it's own reality and allowed me to forget the sad things going on in my life outside of it. It was truly a nightmarish experience, but one that I have to say it was fun to have. My feling is we can compare this all we want with The Blairwitch Project, but Cloverfield, because of it's scale, gets the prize for me. The way the handheld videocamera is used never gets tired. It's inventive all the way. When the film started I was also expecting more perspectives, but this one is compelling enough. I liked the way the scrypt brings every single thread together in a perfect little Hollywood way.

People were scared and eating everything up. First time in ages I can watch a movie in the theatre with everyone in silence. Then the film ended and peopl groaned. These fucking people annoy the hell out of me. In this fucking day and age you still can't have an open ending, an inconclusive ending, without all these assholes complaining about not getting their food spoon fed to them. As with the idiots complaining about getting dizzy: fuck them. There are worst things in this world than getting dizzy from a film.

Spielberg's War of the Worlds is the "other" disaster film of this decade that I can compare Cloverfield too. I think this one is better. It doesn't have the cheesy, corny Spielberg ending with the son living, and it doesn't have an "explanation" that sucks.

[brockly]

this is the worst movie ive seen in a LONG time. its painfully predictable, stupid, unoriginal and for the most part boring as fuck. jj abrams should stick to tv where the futility of his ideas arent bared so noticeably by the constraints of film. the concept goes nowhere and the ending is banal. i cant believe how receptive people are towards this piece of shit.

[Stefen]

I actually liked it. Didn't think I would, but I did. Great idea and alot of fun.

JJ Abrams is still a hack and he was the worst thing about this flick since he obviously made sure it was about pretty people who had absolutely NO personalities at all and threw in a love story because he's a fucking hack, but everything else made up for it.

[pete]

you're right, the writers went out of their way to make the characters as ordinary as possible, in an attempt to make them "relatable" - unrequited love, a bro, a best friend, a soul mate...etc., but the characters' lack of humanity underwhelmed the audience, especially through the last shots of the beautiful coney island ride.  emptiness doesn't mean universal, bro.  and I will go out of my way to link this to Elephant, how both films featured "archetypal" characters without much personality in the face of an unexpected tragedy, and how in both cases the writers substitute their lack of insight for realism, all the while unbeknownst to them, their preference and bias still shone through, enough to make their final products tacky.  in cloverfield's instance, it's bros-tacky, and in Elephant, it's indie darling-tacky.

[MacGuffin]

J.J. Abrams breaks ranks with Hollywood thinking

J.J. Abrams doesn't sound like a big-time Hollywood director and producer when he says the best place to watch his effects-filled disaster film "Cloverfield" is not in movie theaters but at home.

Most filmmakers want fans to see movies the way they were meant to be seen, on big screens in dark theaters where fantasy can become real. Then again, the DVD for box office hit "Cloverfield" lands on retail shelves on Tuesday, so it may be advantageous for Abrams to promote watching the film at home.

Still, Abrams seems sincere. "The thing about this movie -- probably more than any I think -- is that it is better on DVD than in the theater," Abrams told Reuters. "Because the movie is like a videotape. It lives on your TV. In many ways, it is supposed to be viewed on a (TV) monitor."

"Cloverfield" tells of young people in Manhattan escaping monsters that are on a rampage of skyscraper destruction. Abrams said because it is told from the point-of-view of one young man taping the events with a video camera, it has the look and feel of a home movie -- albeit one with huge monsters.

As it plays out, the story tells of one man searching Manhattan for his lover as the city is rapidly destroyed by the alien-looking beings. When the two finally reunite, they must escape the city limits, and their adventure is captured on the shaky, hand-held video camera.

"Cloverfield," which cost a reported $25 million to make, became a surprise hit this past January when it debuted in theaters to a $40 million opening weekend and went on to rake in $166 million at worldwide box offices.

Abrams produced "Cloverfield" and shepherded it through Paramount Pictures, where he directed the Tom Cruise movie "Mission: Impossible III." He also created smash hit TV show "Lost," and is directing the new "Star Trek," due in theaters next year.

"The challenge of ("Star Trek") is to take something that -- despite the baggage of what came before -- was imaginative and unreal and make it feel as real as possible," Abrams said.

The producer, director and writer has become almost a brand name himself, with films and TV shows featuring supernatural and science fiction elements, as well as splashy special effects.

His fans should expect those same qualities from the new "Star Trek" movie, as well as plot twists and characters that give the movie a real-life quality.

"If there is a through-line in the stuff I've been able to work on, it is taking stories that are out there and combining them with people who are us," Abrams said.

[Stefen]

HACK.

[cron]

i saw it on sunday and right after it ended there was a minor earthquake WITH FUCKING RAIN and  i did panic a little , but i'm not a lover of the movie.  i think that 28 weeks later set the new standard for urban terror. and it's a shame cos i thought it started brilliantly, doing some shitty setup and then blowing in your face all 9/11, but then the characters became less than caricatures of the genre and i just wanted it to be over. and i agree with the one who said that a self aware camera wasn't a neccesity.  keep on conquering pop, jj.