This track was pretty much what I was expecting. Great movie, but mediocre RiffTrax.
My favorite part, though, was the little fanfare at the very end after "Today was a good day". Takes me back to the Battlefield Earth RiffTrax. They really should do that more often.
"Leave the Bronx!"
I had to pause and laugh for a few minutes. I just watched Escape 2000 the day before.
Quote from: Trekker4747 on April 22, 2008, 08:22:03 PM
"Leave the Bronx!"
I had to pause and laugh for a few minutes. I just watched Escape 2000 the day before.
I knew it was a reference to that. It was so small, though, that I wasn't quite sure. Thanks for clearing that up :D
I give it an 8/10, funny for sure DUDEBRAH
"I kicked the map into the stream!"
"You bastards!"
"A new life awaits you..."
"Zoinks!"
"The John Hurt Memorial Chest Burster Wing."
"This is a nice monologue for young actors."
"Dude. Wait. Wait. Wait. Dude."
"Happy Birthday Jewel!"
And the shoutouts. "Hello Forum." x2 (One at 43:56, the other at 52:06) "Bacon Egg and Cheese Combos." "That thing you almost infringed on there."
Quote from: Compound on April 22, 2008, 08:47:24 PM
"Zoinks!"
The Shaggy imitation confused me. Why did they have Mike do it? Kevin did a GREAT Shaggy impression in Batman & Robin.
I paid eight bucks extra for the eternal battery option.
One thing I have to say -- WATCH THE MOVIE W/O RIFFTRAX FIRST! The movie is about immersion -- RiffTrax is about pulling you back out of the movies. As you can imagine, the two don't play well together for first timers.
This is actually one of the only movies that I actually thought was better without the RiffTrax...
Quote from: Insert Coin(s) to Continue on April 22, 2008, 09:53:43 PM
One thing I have to say -- WATCH THE MOVIE W/O RIFFTRAX FIRST! The movie is about immersion -- RiffTrax is about pulling you back out of the movies. As you can imagine, the two don't play well together for first timers.
This is actually one of the only movies that I actually thought was better without the RiffTrax...
You're crazy - This movie is terrible. There couldn't have been more than 4 lines of written dialog. And those 4 lines stank.
Basic rule of good cinema: Never let a bunch of idiotic "dudes" improvise.
Note for Cloverfield 2: More monster - less whining. (And hire local actors - no more Cali-Yorkers)
I haven't heard the Riff yet, but I liked the movie too.
Quote from: Gamera on April 22, 2008, 11:48:22 PM
Quote from: Insert Coin(s) to Continue on April 22, 2008, 09:53:43 PM
One thing I have to say -- WATCH THE MOVIE W/O RIFFTRAX FIRST! The movie is about immersion -- RiffTrax is about pulling you back out of the movies. As you can imagine, the two don't play well together for first timers.
This is actually one of the only movies that I actually thought was better without the RiffTrax...
You're crazy - This movie is terrible. There couldn't have been more than 4 lines of written dialog. And those 4 lines stank.
Basic rule of good cinema: Never let a bunch of idiotic "dudes" improvise.
Note for Cloverfield 2: More monster - less whining. (And hire local actors - no more Cali-Yorkers)
You're missing the point of the movie. All of the lines of dialog were carefully written to make it believable. It's the whole idea of immersion. Before you say the movie is terrible, think about how carefully planned out the entire thing was. When do they show the monster? How much do they show? How many questions do they answer? What new twists do they throw our way? It was a brilliant thriller.
Quote from: Insert Coin(s) to Continue on April 23, 2008, 12:17:49 AM
Quote from: Gamera on April 22, 2008, 11:48:22 PM
Quote from: Insert Coin(s) to Continue on April 22, 2008, 09:53:43 PM
One thing I have to say -- WATCH THE MOVIE W/O RIFFTRAX FIRST! The movie is about immersion -- RiffTrax is about pulling you back out of the movies. As you can imagine, the two don't play well together for first timers.
This is actually one of the only movies that I actually thought was better without the RiffTrax...
You're crazy - This movie is terrible. There couldn't have been more than 4 lines of written dialog. And those 4 lines stank.
Basic rule of good cinema: Never let a bunch of idiotic "dudes" improvise.
Note for Cloverfield 2: More monster - less whining. (And hire local actors - no more Cali-Yorkers)
You're missing the point of the movie. All of the lines of dialog were carefully written to make it believable. It's the whole idea of immersion. Before you say the movie is terrible, think about how carefully planned out the entire thing was. When do they show the monster? How much do they show? How many questions do they answer? What new twists do they throw our way? It was a brilliant thriller.
I agree with Insert Coin(s). But I live in NY, so I'm of a biased opinion. Nonetheless, "There is no terror in the bang, only the anticipation of it." Hitchcock. I also think JJ Abrams et al did pretty well translating onto screen some of the same techniques used in Lost for the 'monster', I remember that sound of impending doom distinctly.
Oh, and my favorite line. [lights flicker in subway] "Great. Now the monster's using his hair dryer AND the toaster."
My roommate and I cannot have the microwave AND any other appliance running in our apartment. We have strict protocol for running anything electrical at our place, which includes having to flip the breaker switch if your appliance was the offender.
Well I was able to fully enjoy the movie for the first time, while still busting a gut laughing at the 'trax. It says something about the quality of a 'trax, I think, if you can enjoy it side by side with the movie. It wasn't the best Rifftrax ever, but I got a really cool movie along with a really cool 'trax, and I feel unrippedoff. :^)
"Mandatory Evacuation? YOU CAN'T ORDER ME TO POOP MISTER!!!"
"It sounded like somebody KICKING THE MAP INTO THE STREAM!!"
"There's no character named Jason on Diagnosis Murder"
"This just in, Sandy Cheeks is dead"
"Thanks Superman"
great Rifftrax for a Great Movie
Loved the "You can't order me to poop!" and the Daddy Day Care ref with the "Hello forums"
"The film has become Diogenes searching for a non-narcissistic character."
I thought the movie was wonderfully executed but found every character unlikable so that line really made me laugh.
I really have to applaud Mike and Pals here just from seeing the sample clip. It made me laugh long and hard, especially with the mentions of Rodan and Gamera. I didn't buy Cloverfield's hype for a moment.
"Could we fly in any direction except right next to the monster?"
Quote from: Jacob T. Caboose on April 23, 2008, 03:58:14 AM
"This just in, Sandy Cheeks is dead"
I was curious what they'd say here. It seems to be required that you show a scene from a childrens cartoon in every horror movie these days (I Am Legend, War of the Worlds, Cloverfield...)
Did anyone else feel kind of uncomfortable during the Patrick Swayze line? Something to the effect of, "There he is now! Get it? Because he's a ghost?" "Shame on you, MIke".
...Um...I know what they were going for, but Swayze is dangerously close to REALLY becoming a ghost in real life...
Sorry, no
I also loved the "old guy monster Alarm" thing
"Eh? Lobster? I don't eat shellfish"
So Beth, ever see that Mr Creosote sketch? As a follow up, remember Marlena?
Dudemanbra!!
Well, this movie was an interesting experience for me, as I happened to be 1) somewhat sensitive when it comes to motion sickness and 2) eating wings at the time. It took multiple viewings of the Blair Witch Project before I stopped getting sick watching it. Cloverfield, it seems, will be the same way.
But alas, I didn't projectile vomit (which would have made for a far cooler watching experience) and thought the riffing was pretty good. My three favorite lines:
"It looks really awesome when really badly filmed!!" (maybe not the exact wording, since I was woozy at the time I heard it)
"Uh, we call them 'Flaming Bums..."
and at the end
"White power!!!"
I watched the movie for the first time last week and thought is was a pretty good movie. Call me weird but I thought it showed some insight into what this present generation is facing for the immediate future. Pretty bleak. Some nameless thing ( terrorist) comes along and rips everything you've taken for granted apart with no time at all to even think what it is or how you're going to deal with it. The first part of the movie was supposed to be a vacuous party to emphasis the complacency and innocence of the characters. I've acted like that at a party and I've known all those types of people at one time or another in my life. Without really thinking about it you are saying to yourself, "Yeah I've know that guy(gal)." "I've done that." Now you have identified with the characters and in a sense you are in the movie. Then WHAM! All you have is what you are and how you are going to deal with the situation moment to moment. Pretty good stuff.
I've got the Rifftrax and I tried to watchbut turned it off just as the monster hits Manhattan. I'll revisit it later.
Quote from: Gamera on April 22, 2008, 11:48:22 PM
Quote from: Insert Coin(s) to Continue on April 22, 2008, 09:53:43 PM
One thing I have to say -- WATCH THE MOVIE W/O RIFFTRAX FIRST! The movie is about immersion -- RiffTrax is about pulling you back out of the movies. As you can imagine, the two don't play well together for first timers.
This is actually one of the only movies that I actually thought was better without the RiffTrax...
You're crazy - This movie is terrible. There couldn't have been more than 4 lines of written dialog. And those 4 lines stank.
Basic rule of good cinema: Never let a bunch of idiotic "dudes" improvise.
Note for Cloverfield 2: More monster - less whining. (And hire local actors - no more Cali-Yorkers)
I have to agree with Gamera on this. This is got to be one of the worst monster movies i've ever seen. Its like watching dawson's creek + the blair witch project + a bad godzilla rip-off at the same time.
Since there were
lines referencing Scooby Doo and The Blair Witch Project, I
thought this would be a good place to post this
also
"More heavy breathing than the top of the stairs at Comic-con"
Quote from: Insert Coin(s) to Continue on April 23, 2008, 12:17:49 AM
You're missing the point of the movie. All of the lines of dialog were carefully written to make it believable. It's the whole idea of immersion. Before you say the movie is terrible, think about how carefully planned out the entire thing was. When do they show the monster? How much do they show? How many questions do they answer? What new twists do they throw our way? It was a brilliant thriller.
*Nod nod*
When people are in peril, there is no written dialogue or one-liners. Structured dialogue would ruin the movie completely. It would turn the people in the movie into characters. This is a movie about people.
"Charlie bit me fame"
The Ken Burns narration
Kool Aid Man
"HIS NAME WAS ROBERT HAWKINGS"
"Tiananmen Square Guy gets his revenge"
The Godzilla infringement
and of course
"Dude man Rub dude... brah"
Holy crap what a horrible movie! I can NOT believe that Bad Robot put out this turd when they do such an awesome job with Lost. This makes me want to go find a JJ Abrams cardboard cutout and berate it a la Hobgobblins. At least I had the sense to wait for the Rifftrax to watch it. :highfive:
As far as that trax goes:
I loved the Kool Aid shout outs. LFMAO
The two forum shoutouts were just about most awesomest things ever.
All the dubebrah stuff was funny as hell.
Great riff! Keep em coming!
Quote from: Invader_quirk on April 24, 2008, 02:37:39 PM
It would turn the people in the movie into characters. This is a movie about people.
Oh yeah, I forgot, characters make a movie really terrible.
I didn't say that.
it was supposed to make it seem more real, not that I expect a Robot to understand
Quote from: Invader_quirk on April 24, 2008, 02:37:39 PM
*Nod nod*
When people are in peril, there is no written dialogue or one-liners. Structured dialogue would ruin the movie completely. It would turn the people in the movie into characters. This is a movie about people.
I feel the same way, which is why watching the batteried, horrified yuppies climbing onto the roofs of collapsing buildings and fighting off giant spiders with fire axes to save a hot chick kind of ruined the credibility of the "real people" angle.
And could someone explain what the first 15 minutes of the movie accomplished except removing any empathy or pity I had for the
people?
Establishing relationships and characters?
I didn't even watch the whole riff. I REALLY don't get the point of riffing good movies, especially recent good movies. The bitterness in the tone just makes them seem like bitter writers.
I am going to open myself up to ridicule and derision here but... can someone explain:
"I kicked the map into the stream!"
That reference isn't familiar to me.
I watched the movie first sans Rifftrax and was really skeptical about it making a good Riff (I didn't think there would be enough dialogue and that it was too chaotic) but I loved it.
Quote from: stirrell on April 25, 2008, 05:58:09 AM
I am going to open myself up to ridicule and derision here but... can someone explain:
"I kicked the map into the stream!"
That reference isn't familiar to me.
I watched the movie first sans Rifftrax and was really skeptical about it making a good Riff (I didn't think there would be enough dialogue and that it was too chaotic) but I loved it.
The characters in The Blair Witch Project had a map, which was lost part way though the movie, then a little later one of the characters starts laughing hysterically and tells the others that he "kicked the map into the stream."
It was supposed to be pointing out the character's impending madness or something I think.
At the time when I first watched the movie, it came off that the actor just read the note from the director telling him he had to improv dialog about kicking the map into the stream, and he thought it was hilarious. "Wait, why would I do that? That's stupid. We're trying to get out of the woods, why would I be that moronic?"
One riff that stands out to me is the "Is that Godz..." "NO! It most certainly is not that thing you almost infringed on."
Hmm, covering up the full name of Godzilla as if in fear of a lawsuit, that referencing some recent movie riffing related fiasco perhance? ;D
(https://forum.rifftrax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fopuszine.com%2Fimages%2Fuploads%2Fjoelandthebots.jpg&hash=9b0064abc744bedf1bc1ff584111abf69e243724)
"Whoops..."
Quote from: ScottH on April 24, 2008, 10:46:07 PM
I didn't even watch the whole riff. I REALLY don't get the point of riffing good movies, especially recent good movies.
Can you at least acknowledge that not everyone thinks it was a good movie? That it might even be possible that some people think it was one of the worst movies ever made? If so, there's your answer.
Why wasn't this guy in the film?
(https://forum.rifftrax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi29.tinypic.com%2Ffy1tg5.jpg&hash=4db7bfbcfba6befdcc2ab89c52205a9cb528451a)
"DUDE!"
Quote from: ScottH on April 24, 2008, 10:46:07 PM
Establishing relationships and characters?
I didn't even watch the whole riff. I REALLY don't get the point of riffing good movies, especially recent good movies. The bitterness in the tone just makes them seem like bitter writers.
Q: Why did you riff _________, it's a great movie.
Please see the answer three questions above while keeping in mind the extremely subjective nature of your opinion about the quality of the movie in question.
I thought the movie was pretty good as well. I'm glad it took a different route, rather than the usual big monster shows up, govt. tries to stop it, they bring in the expert scientist who throws around a lot of fancy words that have no meaning, and only the scientist guy can stop the monster because he has pinpointed it's ridiculous weakness. And at least we don't know what or where the monster is or came from, rather than the usual "secret govt. project" routine that's been done about 1,000 times. The mystery just adds to the intrigue of the creature. (For me at least.)
Personally I thought the movie was ok, but annoying...
anyway, my take (http://www.rifftraxfan.com/reviews2008.html#56) and free preview (http://www.rifftraxfan.com/rifferbreakdown.html) now posted.
Quote from: The Warrior on April 25, 2008, 08:52:09 AM
I thought the movie was pretty good as well. I'm glad it took a different route, rather than the usual big monster shows up, govt. tries to stop it, they bring in the expert scientist who throws around a lot of fancy words that have no meaning, and only the scientist guy can stop the monster because he has pinpointed it's ridiculous weakness. And at least we don't know what or where the monster is or came from, rather than the usual "secret govt. project" routine that's been done about 1,000 times. The mystery just adds to the intrigue of the creature. (For me at least.)
I still hate the movie with a flaming passion, but I have to give you this. At least they did avoid these cliches, which you are right about having been driven in the freaking ground.
They did a great job. The Rifftrax crew, I mean. The movie is utter crap. That is a wide hit ball!
I saw it back when it was in theaters, and it somehow managed to be twice as bad the second time around. Before it was the glaring things, like the fact that everyone was pretty much an unsympathetic hipster douchebag. Or that the aforementioned hipster douchebags somehow manage to move like Gordon Freeman through an assortment of explosions, jumps and chasms. Or that the monster looked like a reject from the new Doctor Who. Or that a consumer-level camera somehow managed to survive impact after impact onto solid concrete, run continuously for eight or so hours on a single battery charge, and that the tape inside somehow managed to survive the EMP from the nuke that was dropped on the monster in the god damn first place.
Now? It's the little things, like how the monster changes size in seemingly every shot, or how anyone managed to outrun those antlion things in high heels, or that there's a glaringly ridiculous shot of the monster somehow stamping an armored vehicle filled with high explosives completely flat (as in Monty Python flat). Not to mention all the nice little strategic product placements.
On top of that, the whole thing is pretty much a ham-fisted 9/11 allegory. J.J Abrams and friends must have literally started a clock, right after the planes hit, that counted down the years, months and days until they could make a movie like this and not get lynched for it.
Quote from: ShadowDog on April 25, 2008, 07:46:05 AM
Quote from: ScottH on April 24, 2008, 10:46:07 PM
I didn't even watch the whole riff. I REALLY don't get the point of riffing good movies, especially recent good movies.
Can you at least acknowledge that not everyone thinks it was a good movie? That it might even be possible that some people think it was one of the worst movies ever made? If so, there's your answer.
Those people have never seen Forrest Gump or the 90's version of Rollerball
Quote from: ScottH on April 26, 2008, 04:33:36 AM
Quote from: ShadowDog on April 25, 2008, 07:46:05 AM
Quote from: ScottH on April 24, 2008, 10:46:07 PM
I didn't even watch the whole riff. I REALLY don't get the point of riffing good movies, especially recent good movies.
Can you at least acknowledge that not everyone thinks it was a good movie? That it might even be possible that some people think it was one of the worst movies ever made? If so, there's your answer.
Those people have never seen Forrest Gump or the 90's version of Rollerball
And since I actually enjoyed Forrest Gump, looks like your argument is dead in the water.
Opinions differ, live with it.
Totally with you on the 90's Rollerball though.
"opinions differ, live with it"
It seems to me that I'm not the one who has a problem with differing opinions. The fact I'm one of maybe 4 people who've had the gall to not hate this movie and because of that I'm being hassled, I haven't asked anyone to justify their opinions I'm just stating mine.
*The Forrest Gump and Rollerball line was a joke if it wasn't clear origionally (although I think both those movies are terrible) I always feel odd posting emoticons but it might have needed one.
Quote from: ScottH on April 26, 2008, 05:10:00 AM
"opinions differ, live with it"
It seems to me that I'm not the one who has a problem with differing opinions. The fact I'm one of maybe 4 people who've had the gall to not hate this movie and because of that I'm being hassled, I haven't asked anyone to justify their opinions I'm just stating mine.
But there's a wide range of opinions. I too liked the movie, but I also really liked the Rifftrax. Mike, Bill and Kevin pointing out some dumb things about the movie really doesn't change my opinion, I just thought it was funny. And also people tend to forget that often they're not really "making fun of the movie" rather just making absurdist observations here and there or adding jokes that just kind of work. As is the argument with Raiders, Casino Royale, Willy Wonka and maybe even for some insane people Glitter, just because it's a good movie doesn't mean it won't make a good Rifftrax.
Agreed, I've enjoyed them reviewing great movies like Raiders and Willy Wonka (although I refuse to watch the Halloween riff) where they get into the spirit and have fun, however I think it's the tone the guys sometimes take with recent movies is what bothers me. It's too much like what seems to be the message board mentality of anything pre-2000 is an untouchable classic and everything after that sucks, it just makes them seem old and jealous to my mind.
"Oh thank god, 'Diddy is here!", the making fun of the noises the spider-things made, and the "dudebromanmovemovemoverunrunrungogogo" repititions were my favorites ;D
Quote from: ScottH on April 26, 2008, 06:38:25 AM
Agreed, I've enjoyed them reviewing great movies like Raiders and Willy Wonka (although I refuse to watch the Halloween riff) where they get into the spirit and have fun, however I think it's the tone the guys sometimes take with recent movies is what bothers me. It's too much like what seems to be the message board mentality of anything pre-2000 is an untouchable classic and everything after that sucks, it just makes them seem old and jealous to my mind.
What started all this was your comment about the crew should not riff "good movies." And as just this page is shown, no two people are going to agree on what that means so basically they wouldn't be able to riff anything. So I don't think we should worry about whether or not they riff "good movies" and just judge each riff on how funny it is.
Quote from: Invader_quirk on April 24, 2008, 02:37:39 PMWhen people are in peril, there is no written dialogue or one-liners. Structured dialogue would ruin the movie completely. It would turn the people in the movie into characters. This is a movie about people.
Yep; stupid, annoying people that make me weep for the future, but, people...
Anyway, I only watched it with the Riff, but I thought the movie did a pretty good job of what it set out to do, even if I didn't like the characters very much. And the Riff was pretty frickin' funny.
I didn't even watch the whole riff. I REALLY don't get the point of riffing good movies, especially recent good movies. [/quote]
Can you at least acknowledge that not everyone thinks it was a good movie? That it might even be possible that some people think it was one of the worst movies ever made? If so, there's your answer.
[/quote]
Those people have never seen Forrest Gump or the 90's version of Rollerball
[/quote]
And since I actually enjoyed Forrest Gump, looks like your argument is dead in the water.
Opinions differ, live with it.
Totally with you on the 90's Rollerball though.
[/quote]
It seems most of us either loved or hated this movie with every fiber. My roommate told me about a horror-flick guru who, 30 minutes into this flick, stood up, shouted "THIS MOVIE SUCKS--I WANT MY MONEY BACK!" People started laughing, and this was quickly followed by 3/4 of the theater walking out and demanding their own money back. Maybe big-screen shaky cam had something to do with it, as if it was annoying enough to make some people hate everything about it. Okay, enough psychoanalysis, which is probably inaccurate.
I sat through the Crossroads riff without flinching.
I made it through the Glitter riff with a minimal of pain.
This one had me wanting- WANTING- to turn it off within the first 10 minutes. Not because of the riff, which was good, but because the movie is so painfully derivative and insipid I wanted to claw my eyes out. Not even the riff saves this dog. And there was potential there, too. The possibility of a good story ruined by someone's insistence that they rip off the (now overused) Blair Witch structure. This may be one of the few riffs I never watch again.
Some people keep bringing up the overuse of the Blair Witch structure.
Have I miissed a bunch of movies filmed from first-person prespectives using consumer-level cameras and presented as that tape? Because I can only think of two. And they're 8 years apart. So, that to me doesn't seem like an overuse of a film style.
Quote from: papa_november on April 26, 2008, 12:51:55 AM
They did a great job. The Rifftrax crew, I mean. The movie is utter crap. That is a wide hit ball!
I saw it back when it was in theaters, and it somehow managed to be twice as bad the second time around. Before it was the glaring things, like the fact that everyone was pretty much an unsympathetic hipster douchebag. Or that the aforementioned hipster douchebags somehow manage to move like Gordon Freeman through an assortment of explosions, jumps and chasms. Or that the monster looked like a reject from the new Doctor Who. Or that a consumer-level camera somehow managed to survive impact after impact onto solid concrete, run continuously for eight or so hours on a single battery charge, and that the tape inside somehow managed to survive the EMP from the nuke that was dropped on the monster in the god damn first place.
Now? It's the little things, like how the monster changes size in seemingly every shot, or how anyone managed to outrun those antlion things in high heels, or that there's a glaringly ridiculous shot of the monster somehow stamping an armored vehicle filled with high explosives completely flat (as in Monty Python flat). Not to mention all the nice little strategic product placements. On top of that, the whole thing is pretty much a ham-fisted 9/11 allegory. J.J Abrams and friends must have literally started a clock, right after the planes hit, that counted down the years, months and days until they could make a movie like this and not get lynched for it.
Agreed, you just stated all my problems with this "movie"....
the Rifftrax itself, great as always, a little thin on the riffs, but they didn't have much to work with here, totally unsympathetic, annoying, irritating characters, motion-sickness inducing "camera work" (they must've used an *UN*Steadicam for the footage ;) ), heck, I was rooting for the monster and it's little Facehugger(Facebiter?)-Snow-Crab-Tarantula dealies the whole time (and how exactly do the Facebiters impregnate their victims by *biting* them, do their teeth double as ovipositors?), still, the movie itself was beyond bad, I actually found myself wanting to watch Manos, Mr B. Natural, and the Star Wars Holiday Special instead of this crap
Oh, and I hadn't seen Cloverfield in theaters, and I actually watched it through the first time *with* the Rifftrax, I'm glad I did, as I couldn't tolerate watching it a second time, I truly hate this movie
J.J. Abrams, if you're going to make a MONSTER movie, focus on the MONSTER, not the whining interpersonal crap of the Purina Monster Chow, errr, people involved
Toho Studios has nothing to worry about, Godzilla could easily take out Clover, heck, Jet Jaguar could take it down, even frakkin Godzuki could take down Clover
The Rifftrax; 8 out of 10
The Movie; 1 out of 10
Quote from: ShadowDog on April 27, 2008, 11:43:05 AM
What started all this was your comment about the crew should not riff "good movies." And as just this page is shown, no two people are going to agree on what that means so basically they wouldn't be able to riff anything. So I don't think we should worry about whether or not they riff "good movies" and just judge each riff on how funny it is.
But that was just the first half of my point, I clarified why I didn't like the riff in the second line.
Quote from: RoninFox on April 26, 2008, 04:59:58 AM
Quote from: ScottH on April 26, 2008, 04:33:36 AM
Quote from: ShadowDog on April 25, 2008, 07:46:05 AM
Quote from: ScottH on April 24, 2008, 10:46:07 PM
I didn't even watch the whole riff. I REALLY don't get the point of riffing good movies, especially recent good movies.
Can you at least acknowledge that not everyone thinks it was a good movie? That it might even be possible that some people think it was one of the worst movies ever made? If so, there's your answer.
Those people have never seen Forrest Gump or the 90's version of Rollerball
And since I actually enjoyed Forrest Gump, looks like your argument is dead in the water.
Opinions differ, live with it.
I have lots of opinions myself, and I would be the first to admit that just because certain people don't agree with me doesn't mean they're stupid. It just means they're wrong! :D
There is a certain degree of ."willing suspension of disbelief" required when watching this kind of movie. Take Beth's predicament, for example. Obviously the rebar through the shoulder was a plot device to keep her from getting to safety on her own so we can see Rob and the others go on their perilous rescue mission. Now if Beth had told Rob that she was stuck under Travis who in turned was stuck on some rebar the reaction might have been different and not as exciting.
Quote from: Trekker4747 on April 27, 2008, 08:03:27 PM
Some people keep bringing up the overuse of the Blair Witch structure.
Have I miissed a bunch of movies filmed from first-person prespectives using consumer-level cameras and presented as that tape? Because I can only think of two. And they're 8 years apart. So, that to me doesn't seem like an overuse of a film style.
I think one movie was overusing the concept personally.
Nah, it's a fun and still relevant concept.
I have seen the movie, but not the riff yet.
As far as the movie, I think it was a really good concept for an updated Godzilla movie. Instead of just following hte monster and military around, show the effects the "out of the blue" monster attack has on an average people. And the only real way to do that would be via people running around with a camcorder. The fact that all the "who, what, why and where" questions were not answered made sense in the context of the movie.
Problems with the execution:
1. The characters were all annoying narcists.
2. HUD was beyond annoying
3. I am sorry, but a few laser guided missles and bombs would have blown the monster to bits.
4. The size of the monster seemed to change from scene to scene. I am sure that it really did not, but is sure seemed that way to us.
5. The characters sure had good cardio! They could run all day, up 40 flights of stairs and not get really winded.
6. The camcorder had unlimited battery life, nigh vision, search light........ Q from James Bond would be envious.
Quote3. I am sorry, but a few laser guided missles and bombs would have blown the monster to bits.
*That* confidently familiar with non-exsistant unknown monsters, are we?
Quote from: Trekker4747 on April 28, 2008, 10:21:08 AM
Quote3. I am sorry, but a few laser guided missles and bombs would have blown the monster to bits.
*That* confidently familiar with non-exsistant unknown monsters, are we?
It has to be some sort of flesh. Missle make flesh all blow-uppy..... if not, I want my tax money back.
Quote from: PSLOwner on April 28, 2008, 10:33:49 AM
Quote from: Trekker4747 on April 28, 2008, 10:21:08 AM
Quote3. I am sorry, but a few laser guided missles and bombs would have blown the monster to bits.
*That* confidently familiar with non-exsistant unknown monsters, are we?
It has to be some sort of flesh. Missle make flesh all blow-uppy..... if not, I want my tax money back.
I agree, there is no level of suspension of disbelief that is remotely attainable that will ever make me believe a creature made of flesh
and blood cannot be blown up by cellulose encased laser guided bombs. After the monster got hit... and survived without a scratch I might
add, the movie got very silly to Monty Python-like proportions, just not funny.
Quote from: GLaDOS on April 28, 2008, 11:35:10 AM
After the monster got hit... and survived without a scratch I might add....
Maybe there was more than one giant creature...and they actually did manage to kill a few of them...
Quote from: Douglin on April 28, 2008, 11:40:18 AM
Quote from: GLaDOS on April 28, 2008, 11:35:10 AM
After the monster got hit... and survived without a scratch I might add....
Maybe there was more than one giant creature...and they actually did manage to kill a few of them...
Or the monster was made of FLUBBER. :scared:
I think that is the achilles heel of any modern monster movie....... modern weapons would just blow them to bits.
Quote from: amityisland on April 26, 2008, 04:27:15 PM
"Oh thank god, 'Diddy is here!", the making fun of the noises the spider-things made, and the "dudebromanmovemovemoverunrunrungogogo" repititions were my favorites ;D
Sounds to me like Reb Brown from Space Mutiny. Did they say those lines in a high pitched shriek of a voice?
Quote from: PSLOwner on April 28, 2008, 08:23:57 AM
As far as the movie, I think it was a really good concept for an updated Godzilla movie. Instead of just following hte monster and military around, show the effects the "out of the blue" monster attack has on an average people.
I honestly think Godzilla: GMK did an awfully good job of this despite it not having as top knotch an effects budget as Cloverfield. Also Gamera 3: Revenge of Iris seamlessly incorporated surprise monster attacks on cities pretty well. It's not like Cloverfield was treading on virgin territory here.
Quote from: papa_november on April 26, 2008, 12:51:55 AM
It's the little things, like how the monster changes size in seemingly every shot, or how anyone managed to outrun those antlion things in high heels ...
What? The antlion things were in high heels? Well then no *wonder* the yuppies could outrun them! ;-)
Seriously, though, I'm with you on that one. When they switched the camera (which appeared more magical than Gandolph's staff) to night vision and we got a look at them (the bugs, not the yuppies), I thought it was a cute "Holy S--t!" effect, but it should *also* have meant those kids were toast. How four yuppies were able to fight them off (and I think only Marlena and Rob were doing any actual "fighting") and escape with only one person getting so much as bitten was just one of the less credible sequences.
Quote from: papa_november on April 26, 2008, 12:51:55 AM
... or that there's a glaringly ridiculous shot of the monster somehow stamping an armored vehicle filled with high explosives completely flat (as in Monty Python flat).
Actually, it reminded me of "Bambi Meets Godzilla" flat. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAVYYe87b9w from ~1969; not sure if it or Python's foot came first. ) In fact, I wonder if maybe BMG might have been going through the film maker's mind for that shot, since he was rather up-front about Godzilla's influence on him. (He didn't say anything about it in the commentary when that specific moment came up; he was busy talking about something else.)
Gadfly
I saw it for the first time with the Trax. I think the movie did what it wanted to do really well, i.e. chutney-eye view of a monster attack. Problem for me was the aforementioned uselessosity of the characters. The act of Scruffy Guy going to rescue his not-gf should have been powerful, instead I could not help but think that he was risking his uselessness to go rescue another bit of uselessness. I need my heroes to be at least partially identifiable-with.
Not affected by missiles? Eh, I would have bought that if they'd thrown in a technobabble line about "super-resistant epidermal whatsisthings"
The REAL problem is that I wanted more cowbell, and by cowbell I of course mean monster. My one line review would have been "More smashy, less angsty, please".
-dale
Godzilla can be shot by missiles and he keeps tickin'.
I put the Cloverfield monster in the same boat. At the heart you still have a giant superpowered monster trashing the city for possibly misunderstood reasons. Cloverfield managed to up the intensity a few notches (And did it well, I thought) but it's still a giant monster movie and there's no need to question the Cloverfield monster any more than we would Godzilla. :^)
Who would DARE question Godzilla??
Like some others here, I thought the concept of the film was good, but the execution was pretty tedious. Or maybe it's just not my kind of movie. In any case, while I can see what some people like about the movie, it didn't stir many emotions for me, so I enjoyed the riffing.
"That camera is harder to get rid of than the One Ring."
Disembaudio's little musical interlude at the end.
And the guys' spider imitations that made them sound like the love child of Jimmy Durante and Popeye.
(carriage goes by) Bill says, "Prince is in there, you just can't see him."
...oh and this movie is like a Gap commercial that got attacked by a monster.
"You are ordered to leave the Bronx!"
It took me 2 times of watching this Rifftrax to catch that, and it had my crying in my hands I was laughing so hard.
As for Cloverfield being bad and requiring immersion, let me say this: I probably would have thought that Cloverfield was awesome if I had never seen either Godzilla or Blair Witch Project, which is understandable as Cloverfield is basically Godzilla meets Blair Witch.
Possibly the silliest thing was that they stopped to get Rob a new cel phone battery (Hey - when was the last time you bought a new cel phone battery, and it was charged up right out of the package?), but they never stopped to get what's-her-face something slightly more practical to walk around a rubble-strewn disaster area in than four-inch stiletto heels.
Favorite lines: the "Diagnosis Murder" bit.
There was a missed opportunity for a riff early on, after Kevin's "Fire Island" riff, a great response riff would be;
(incredulous) "An entire *ISLAND* made of FIRE? how manly!"
Yeah, I watched this one first without the riff and with it almost back to back (I took time out to watch some of the special features). No, I didn't care for it.
Impressions of the movie without the riff: 1. HUD must be the bravest man alive or the dumbest, no matter what the peril and no matter how close it is.....he will not ever turn off the damn camera. I know the camcorder was the only plot device they had to show action, but common sense suggests when you are on the slanted roof of a crumbling building, you hang on to something for balance, not the goddamn camera. 2. The monster looked like a wad of chewed bubble gum with teeth. 3. I thought all of the tension in the film was ruined by the craptastic love story. 4. I really hated the "Dude", every third word bullcrap.............this was the other thing besides the camcorder that was exactly like Blair Witch, except instead of "Dude", they repeated, "Damn, Fuck, Shit, Damn" ad neaseum in BWP. 5. And finally...unfortunately for Cloverfield, there can only be a first time for a camera effect. Blair Witch covered that camcorder documentary style 8 or 9 years ago, so in this film it feels completely unoriginal. It is much like every film after The Matrix that used Bullet Time effects always looked to be ripping off from The Wachowskis.
Final Opinion of Cloverfield unriffed: It is The Blair Witch Project, Godzilla, Alien, and Dawson's Creek all mixed together in a blender.
"You've got to hand it to the government. Within hours, they already have special tents where people can go to explode."
This has been stated many times, but the Escape 2000 "Leave the Bronx!" line had me choking on my soda. Actually, in the same scene the "Live the good life in the Off-world Colonies!" Blade Runner quote is another favourite of mine from the MST3k years.
Please, feel free to throw more MST episode references in future Rifftrax!
The movie itself is being debated to death right now, but I'd just like to say that I should probably feel bad for laughing actually out loud at the scene where the exploding goth girl explodes. At first I thought they shot her, but looking back she actually does explode. It's just so random!
You should have known she'd explode since her name was Exploding Goth Girl. :rimshot:
I think the major problem with this movie is that it broke the first rule of monster movies and that is monster movies are suppose to be about the monster and not the stupid idiots running away from the monster. Especially not people risk the lives trying to get good shots of the monster with a camcorder while say dude every five seconds and whine every chance they get. Not to mention that Godzilla and King Kong could both kick the Cloverfeild monsters ass any day of the week..
Strictly speaking, it has more in common with the Horror genre than the Monster Movie genre. The threat is largely unseen and seemingly supernatural, and the focus is on the struggles of the "heroes" to escape/save others. A Monster Movie focuses, as you say, on the monster much of the time, and typically carries some kind of "don't mess with Mother Nature" kind of message. Cloverfield actually has more in common with Nightmare on Elm Street than it does with Godzilla.
"Dude! Bro? Dude? Bro! Dude! Bro?"
"A look inside Shania Twain's head."
"It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man."
"We could have all been on the first copter if we hadn't rewound the footage of Marlena exploding 94 times."
I thought the movie was brilliant, and the trax even moreso. That is, of course, my opinion, and that will not change.
Awesome 'trax. :clap:
It helps to watch this one unriffed first.
Fave line: "The scientific inflections....of HUD." LOL! ;D
"The whole movie has been rendered unconcious!"
"Go! Go! Go! Go! Go! Move! Move! Move! Move! Move! Run! Run! Run! Run! Run! Pant! Pant! Pant! Pant! Pant! Fall! Fall! Fall! Fall! Fall!"
"That Jason is so shelfish! Dying first..."
"It's feeding time at the Maxim Zoo."
Lots of great lines, but my current favorite:
Beth: 'I didn't want to do this on camera, but...'
Kevin's Riff: 'I'm going to eat a live squirrel.'
Forgot to mention:
'...as a friend'
Favorite riffs (both from Bill):
"Hello, forums." (Onil and I actually high-fived over that one.)
"DO NOT WANT"
God, I love the intranet nerd jokes.
Quote from: Insert Coin(s) to Continue on April 23, 2008, 12:17:49 AM
Quote from: Gamera on April 22, 2008, 11:48:22 PM
Quote from: Insert Coin(s) to Continue on April 22, 2008, 09:53:43 PM
One thing I have to say -- WATCH THE MOVIE W/O RIFFTRAX FIRST! The movie is about immersion -- RiffTrax is about pulling you back out of the movies. As you can imagine, the two don't play well together for first timers.
This is actually one of the only movies that I actually thought was better without the RiffTrax...
You're crazy - This movie is terrible. There couldn't have been more than 4 lines of written dialog. And those 4 lines stank.
Basic rule of good cinema: Never let a bunch of idiotic "dudes" improvise.
Note for Cloverfield 2: More monster - less whining. (And hire local actors - no more Cali-Yorkers)
You're missing the point of the movie. All of the lines of dialog were carefully written to make it believable. It's the whole idea of immersion. Before you say the movie is terrible, think about how carefully planned out the entire thing was. When do they show the monster? How much do they show? How many questions do they answer? What new twists do they throw our way? It was a brilliant thriller.
The idea of the movie was pretty good, very innovative. But the movie wasn't that good (my opinion, mainly b/c of the dialog, there are those types of people (dude wait dude) out in the world & I am not fond of them). I know it is a movie, but how can a monster & an army sneak up on the main characters like that?
I know nobody will read this, but...
I don't think the Blair Witch Project was unique because it was handheld and videotaped. It was unique because it was a no-budget piece of boring crap where literally nothing happens for its duration, and yet it made millions of dollars.
Although this was clearly a ripoff of that, it was almost infinitely more entertaining once the action starts, even as dull as that was.
The "pitch" concept is really stupid, assuming that Godzilla is only popular in Japan and that America needs its own Godzilla. Um, the only reason Godzilla doesn't have the cultural meaning in America that it does in Japan is that America doesn't have a culture. Otherwise, it WAS released here, even had two remakes, and has always been popular, yes even including toys in most toy stores.
Despite the 9/11 fear mongering making it a rough analogue of Japan's interpretation of Godzilla, it doesn't make it a great monster movie because it's so unforgivably unoriginal. Distinctly American, sure, but it has to be good and groundbreaking on top of that. It wasn't. War of the Worlds did this, and better, and even that wasn't particularly great. And Tremors is a 100% homegrown American monster movie, it had realistic characters and reactions, and yet it managed to have a sense of humor and be fun and entertaining as well as scary even as a PG-13 movie. Can a stupid bat-crustacean designed by one guy top that just because it's in a gimmicky YouTube movie?
And of all the problems I had with this film, the video camera was not one of them. People seem to think it's clever nitpicking or something, but I have a video camera that has a light, and night vision, and can make a crappy 80 minute movie where people say dude a lot. It's not magic. The conceit is supposed to be that the movie is more or less in real time. And that's only destroyed by the fact that it's daylight at the end, which I doubt would have happened 80 minutes after the party. You can just assume the battery was charged up before the party, and that HUD did actually stop taping a couple of times.
The trouble with the movie is that while the cool parts are cool, most of the movie is not the cool parts, and thus percentagewise, the movie is not very good. The 18 minutes of dudebra party is cinematic waterboarding. The rest is okay, but too much walking and talking and blah. I never finished watching Blair Witch because while it was unnerving, it was only unnerving because it was seriously annoying the crap out of me and making me feel like I was stuck at someone's house forced to watch their home movies while they had a loud, violent argument in the kitchen. A lot of people might not analyze it that much and just interpret the experience as being "scary," which it wasn't. Cloverfield on that other hand was just slightly annoying and slightly interesting, not boring enough to walk out of, but certainly not good enough to cry foul about a Rifftrax. Though the Rifftrax should have been cheaper.
P.S. I think the reason it focused on the people, aside from the obvious fact that baby sea monsters don't own video cameras, is that J.J. Abrams is a fan of Stephen King.
P.P.S. I like how we all type "HUD" as if it stood for Heads-Up Display, when it was just short for Hudson. Which is an Aliens reference. Which is, incredibly, less nerdy than a nod to the display on a first-person shooter, although I can see the similarity.
P.P.P.S The sound the parasites made is the funniest thing I've ever heard. And I once heard a joke.
Quote from: bratpop on October 08, 2008, 09:44:14 PM
I know nobody will read this, but...
I don't think the Blair Witch Project was unique because it was handheld and videotaped. It was unique because it was a no-budget piece of boring crap where literally nothing happens for its duration, and yet it made millions of dollars.
Although this was clearly a ripoff of that, it was almost infinitely more entertaining once the action starts, even as dull as that was.
The "pitch" concept is really stupid, assuming that Godzilla is only popular in Japan and that America needs its own Godzilla. Um, the only reason Godzilla doesn't have the cultural meaning in America that it does in Japan is that America doesn't have a culture. Otherwise, it WAS released here, even had two remakes, and has always been popular, yes even including toys in most toy stores.
Despite the 9/11 fear mongering making it a rough analogue of Japan's interpretation of Godzilla, it doesn't make it a great monster movie because it's so unforgivably unoriginal. Distinctly American, sure, but it has to be good and groundbreaking on top of that. It wasn't. War of the Worlds did this, and better, and even that wasn't particularly great. And Tremors is a 100% homegrown American monster movie, it had realistic characters and reactions, and yet it managed to have a sense of humor and be fun and entertaining as well as scary even as a PG-13 movie. Can a stupid bat-crustacean designed by one guy top that just because it's in a gimmicky YouTube movie?
And of all the problems I had with this film, the video camera was not one of them. People seem to think it's clever nitpicking or something, but I have a video camera that has a light, and night vision, and can make a crappy 80 minute movie where people say dude a lot. It's not magic. The conceit is supposed to be that the movie is more or less in real time. And that's only destroyed by the fact that it's daylight at the end, which I doubt would have happened 80 minutes after the party. You can just assume the battery was charged up before the party, and that HUD did actually stop taping a couple of times.
The trouble with the movie is that while the cool parts are cool, most of the movie is not the cool parts, and thus percentagewise, the movie is not very good. The 18 minutes of dudebra party is cinematic waterboarding. The rest is okay, but too much walking and talking and blah. I never finished watching Blair Witch because while it was unnerving, it was only unnerving because it was seriously annoying the crap out of me and making me feel like I was stuck at someone's house forced to watch their home movies while they had a loud, violent argument in the kitchen. A lot of people might not analyze it that much and just interpret the experience as being "scary," which it wasn't. Cloverfield on that other hand was just slightly annoying and slightly interesting, not boring enough to walk out of, but certainly not good enough to cry foul about a Rifftrax. Though the Rifftrax should have been cheaper.
P.S. I think the reason it focused on the people, aside from the obvious fact that baby sea monsters don't own video cameras, is that J.J. Abrams is a fan of Stephen King.
P.P.S. I like how we all type "HUD" as if it stood for Heads-Up Display, when it was just short for Hudson. Which is an Aliens reference. Which is, incredibly, less nerdy than a nod to the display on a first-person shooter, although I can see the similarity.
P.P.P.S The sound the parasites made is the funniest thing I've ever heard. And I once heard a joke.
:clap: Very well put sir.
Was going to wait for this to go under $10 before getting it but Target now has it for $13 so I picked it up...
Some really funny stuff in the RiffTrax, the cool aid jokes got me for some reason, and the battlefield earth references.
Seems this movie couldn't make up it's mind if it was a horror movie or a monster movie, with more likable characters it could have succeeded as a horror movie, but since I couldn't stand any of them there was no horror when they were killed off (instead there was much rejoicing). Don't think I would have made it past the party scene without rifftrax.
Better joke for the foot squashing the tank would have been "IT'S", or maybe I should take a break from the monty pythons flying circus box set. ;D
Later,
Marty