Comments on: Hey, ‘Cloverfield’! Leave New York City alone!

By: ViSalus

ViSalus — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 10:35:20 +0000

It just seemed too similar to the disaster that never came to be in the first volume. It was a very informative.

By: buy new pc

buy new pc — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 07:50:34 +0000

The emotional impact of an asteroid taking out the Staples Center doesn’t compare to seeing the Statue of Liberty in pieces. That’s just unimaginable!”

By: coolblue

coolblue — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 19:38:04 +0000

ohk honestly, i know somone who died in 9-11 and i saw cloverfield and i thought it was still a great movie. I mean sure i’m upset about the whole thing of course i am i just think you are all overreacting about this. It is just a movie. Hollywood deffiently didnt have any intentions to make peope upset about 9-11 i mean its just a movie. All movies have things crashing into builldings. And the fact that its in new york ..no offence but get over it. I live in longisland and it’s w.e like why dont they do movies in longisland? oh wait i know why because it doesnt have landmarks people reallyy know about. i am 15 years old and i have more common sence then most of you people. Honeslty grow up and move on with your life.

By: jason

jason — Mon, 19 May 2008 20:47:30 +0000

Eat a dick…

By: Trey

Trey — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 02:53:12 +0000

I honestly failed to notice a huge amount of 9/11 references. Yeah, it was a monster, yeah it was NYC, and yeah buildings were being blown up. Reminds me of a couple of movies that were made way before 9/11. I completely missed most of the 9/11 symbolism in the movie, in fact, I didn’t even think once about it until after the movie.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:30:21 +0000

I note with interest the people that are expressing concern about a film that is apparently drawing on 9/11 ssymbolism. And I think that is understandable. I also note the question about whether 7 years after the event is too soon. Again, understandable.
But what is worth noting is that the film that is the most obvious origin of the film is Godzilla. That was the first thing people would think about when they saw the initial trailer. But the original Japanese Godzilla film was made in 1954, only 9 years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the creature, mutated by atomic testing, quite clearly stood for the atomic bombs and created an opportunity to explore issues of the bombing in a fantastic less-confrontational setting.
Now, I haven’t seen Cloverfield, I have no idea whether this is what they do in the film. But by focusing on ordinary characters, they certainly have an opportunity to explore 9/11 issues in a non-9/11 setting. And that could be a good thing.

By: robin

robin — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 06:30:28 +0000

I couldn’t agree with you more! I’m so sick of seeing NYC destroyed. I saw it for real on 9/11 and don’t need to see it on tv or the movies. I loved how on Jericho NYC survived – they showed some respect on that show!

By: cbc

cbc — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:12:20 +0000

Kevin,
Your post is the best post by far even though I love the pats.

By: cbc

cbc — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 23:57:52 +0000

Ah you New Yorkers all love it. Makes you feel even more like you are the center of the universe than you already do.

By: Emoney

Emoney — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:20:29 +0000

I’m also a Minneapolitan. I love it, but I would be very amused to see it nuked or destroyed by monsters in a movie. They never make “big” movies here — the closest we get is Fargo which has about 2 scenes actually in Minneapolis. I envy NYC its status as the preeminent movie/tv background city.