The Cloverfield Paradox (Official Thread)
- Thread starter satam55
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cloverfield god particle
Theodoresolderbreh
No Shorts No Malarkey
I agree even tho I was trying to find understanding in the tripe I just watched the fact I had to branch out to do so should tell you everything. The ship hijinks go unexplained and the parts on earth all feel tacked on To connect it to Cloverfield which Makes more plot contrivances and other problems to the overall story. shyt was a trash fire. And people comparing this to bright? Bright had structure and explained shyt that was going... Imagine that wand showed up and they dont say shyt about it
..it's just there.....or will Smith's arm gets cut off by his car and then it eats him... And the movie just kept going.. we would bd over there saying the same shyt in that thread.
CoolazzFemale
All Star
I fell asleep trying to watch it
Theodoresolderbreh
No Shorts No Malarkey
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.deno...-cloverfield-paradox-how-god-particle-changed guess brehs in here we're right they changed the script to add Cloverfield stuff and surprise surprise it all sucked and felt tacked on.
Theodoresolderbreh
No Shorts No Malarkey
and this movie was structured better just because you liked it? That's the gauge huh? I never said it was a great flim but it sure AF told it's story much better than this garbageBright was structured?? you nikkas mayne....
HamAndEgger
All Star
To a nikka with a shirtless queen as his avatar. My guy, no, hit the doeSorry BUD, movie is still
Adam3000
-
Bright is better then Cloverfield particle but that don't make them particles trash
Women tend to not be entertained by science fiction
O.T.I.S.
Veteran
Honestly... I thought it was trash
But like, it wasn't trash because of the effects or the acting. It was the fukking plot and script. Them taking a random movie, fukking with the script, making it NOT scary and damn near boring, only to add a random Cloverfield monster in the end and call it Cloverfield and vaguely use a particle accelerator paradox to explain the other movies.
Thats why it was trash. I honestly started skipping parts in the end just to get this shyt over with. It was more dissapointing then trash to me i guess. But it was still some stitched together mess with a lot of scientific talk that explained nothing.
But like, it wasn't trash because of the effects or the acting. It was the fukking plot and script. Them taking a random movie, fukking with the script, making it NOT scary and damn near boring, only to add a random Cloverfield monster in the end and call it Cloverfield and vaguely use a particle accelerator paradox to explain the other movies.
Thats why it was trash. I honestly started skipping parts in the end just to get this shyt over with. It was more dissapointing then trash to me i guess. But it was still some stitched together mess with a lot of scientific talk that explained nothing.
O.T.I.S.
Veteran
Like this is how bad the movie was...
If it wasn't for homie from Gotham not using 2 minutes of the movie to explain the consequences of the particle accelerator, we wouldn't have known wtf was going on and it wouldn't have had shyt to do with Cloverfield.
I understand 2 realities folding in on each other (I guess) and multiple realities being effected, but there were no monsters, Demons, Aliens, etc., that made this interesting. Even the ship acting weird wasn't scary..
It was just like "his arm is moving by itself... Ok" :wizshrug:
Like it seemed like the ship was trying to kill them... Then it didn't... Then it did.. Then it didn't. Like people started dying for no fukking reason almost.
I dont know.. Just sloppy plot/story/script and a waste of great actors and a potentially great horror movie.
If it wasn't for homie from Gotham not using 2 minutes of the movie to explain the consequences of the particle accelerator, we wouldn't have known wtf was going on and it wouldn't have had shyt to do with Cloverfield.
I understand 2 realities folding in on each other (I guess) and multiple realities being effected, but there were no monsters, Demons, Aliens, etc., that made this interesting. Even the ship acting weird wasn't scary..
It was just like "his arm is moving by itself... Ok" :wizshrug:
Like it seemed like the ship was trying to kill them... Then it didn't... Then it did.. Then it didn't. Like people started dying for no fukking reason almost.
I dont know.. Just sloppy plot/story/script and a waste of great actors and a potentially great horror movie.
99% why people dont like this
How Netflix and Paramount Pictures took a crappy movie and turned it into gold
The art of the deal
:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/58608391/TCP_07318_R_Mon.1518023815.jpg)
Scott Garfield/Netflix
The Cloverfield Paradoxisn’t a very good movie, but that fact doesn’t really matter to any of the companies involved in its production or distribution.
This is the sort of movie that would have lost money at the box office after a standard, and expensive, run of trailers and promotion. A standard theatrical release would have been poisoned by poor reviews and worth of mouth, but the current situation allowed everyone to walk out of the film a winner.
Well, except the audience. And even that is arguable.
Taking a bad movie and turning it into gold
It has been reported that the film’s budget was around $40 million, and it seems as if everyone knew it was in trouble for some time.
“Sources say the movie needed some work, and while Abrams expressed an intent to get down to business in postproduction, it was too little, too late,” The Hollywood Reporter stated. “Several sources suggested that Abrams’ attention may be taken up by his unexpected new assignment, the final installment of the Star WarsSkywalker episodes, which he signed on to in September after the firing of director Colin Trevorrow.”
The Cloverfield Paradoxwould have cost Paramount more money to promote before a theatrical release, and the first run of bad reviews would likely be followed by a second run of stories about how the film failed to do well at the box office. The standard approach to releasing a film in the theaters, in this case, would turn a known issue into a very public way to lose a large amount of money.
RELATED
What’s coming and going on Netflix is now easy to find
The Cloverfield Paradox is a stunt release tied to a mediocre movie
When your body isn’t your own: The politics of Altered Carbon
But Netflix provided another way out. The Hollywood Reporter is now saying that Netflix paid around $50 million for The Cloverfield Paradox, which means that the movie became instantly profitable for Paramount. The studio no longer has to worry about ticket sales or post-release promotion. They just sign a few papers and suddenly a flop becomes a film that made back its budget and then some. After that it becomes Netflix’s problem.
If these numbers are correct, and that’s assuming a lot, The Cloverfield Paradox is one of the most deft handlings of a stinker in Hollywood history.
A Super Bowl ad isn’t cheap, but it’s a lot cheaper than a full promotional campaign and Netflix was promoting itself as much as it was promoting the movie. That wasn’t a trailer for The Cloverfield Paradox, it was a commercial for Netflix that sold the idea that surprises could come at any moment. Netflix bought a lot of promotion with that movie and its one ad.
Netflix doesn’t need to sell tickets, the company just needs to bring buzz to its platform. And promoting a movie few people knew existed during the Super Bowl before allowing them to stream the whole thing after the game is certainly a great way to build some buzz. Netflix looks like the platform where anything is possible, and big releases could happen at any time. You better subscribe so you don’t miss out!
We don’t know how many people have watched The Cloverfield Paradox, but viewership numbers are almost beside the point. Netflix bought a movie with a big name attached for a song, and turned it into a smart promotional message for its entire business. It’s the service where anything is possible, and surprises are inevitable. Paramount was able to take a movie that would have lost a significant amount of money and sell it for a profit without pouring any more money down the drain. Everyone wins.
So how did the audiences do? The movie isn’t good, but Netflix audiences likely expect less from a movie that’s streaming on a service they already pay for than from a theatrical release that requires the cost of a few tickets and a night out. Even if people were disappointed in the movie, Netflix is selling the idea that you don’t know where the next blockbuster is coming from on its service, nor when it will arrive.
There is also the possibility that the studio or Netflix has costs that aren’t accounted for in this sort of napkin math, but even if that’s the case everyone did the right thing to minimize their losses and make the most out of what they had.
You may not have liked The Cloverfield Paradox, but the money was well spent if you signed up or continue to pay for the service while hoping that the next movie released on Netflix is better.
The art of the deal
- By Ben Kuchera
- on February 7, 2018 9:30 am
Scott Garfield/Netflix
The Cloverfield Paradoxisn’t a very good movie, but that fact doesn’t really matter to any of the companies involved in its production or distribution.
This is the sort of movie that would have lost money at the box office after a standard, and expensive, run of trailers and promotion. A standard theatrical release would have been poisoned by poor reviews and worth of mouth, but the current situation allowed everyone to walk out of the film a winner.
Well, except the audience. And even that is arguable.
Taking a bad movie and turning it into gold
It has been reported that the film’s budget was around $40 million, and it seems as if everyone knew it was in trouble for some time.
“Sources say the movie needed some work, and while Abrams expressed an intent to get down to business in postproduction, it was too little, too late,” The Hollywood Reporter stated. “Several sources suggested that Abrams’ attention may be taken up by his unexpected new assignment, the final installment of the Star WarsSkywalker episodes, which he signed on to in September after the firing of director Colin Trevorrow.”
The Cloverfield Paradoxwould have cost Paramount more money to promote before a theatrical release, and the first run of bad reviews would likely be followed by a second run of stories about how the film failed to do well at the box office. The standard approach to releasing a film in the theaters, in this case, would turn a known issue into a very public way to lose a large amount of money.
RELATED
What’s coming and going on Netflix is now easy to find
The Cloverfield Paradox is a stunt release tied to a mediocre movie
When your body isn’t your own: The politics of Altered Carbon
But Netflix provided another way out. The Hollywood Reporter is now saying that Netflix paid around $50 million for The Cloverfield Paradox, which means that the movie became instantly profitable for Paramount. The studio no longer has to worry about ticket sales or post-release promotion. They just sign a few papers and suddenly a flop becomes a film that made back its budget and then some. After that it becomes Netflix’s problem.
If these numbers are correct, and that’s assuming a lot, The Cloverfield Paradox is one of the most deft handlings of a stinker in Hollywood history.
A Super Bowl ad isn’t cheap, but it’s a lot cheaper than a full promotional campaign and Netflix was promoting itself as much as it was promoting the movie. That wasn’t a trailer for The Cloverfield Paradox, it was a commercial for Netflix that sold the idea that surprises could come at any moment. Netflix bought a lot of promotion with that movie and its one ad.
Netflix doesn’t need to sell tickets, the company just needs to bring buzz to its platform. And promoting a movie few people knew existed during the Super Bowl before allowing them to stream the whole thing after the game is certainly a great way to build some buzz. Netflix looks like the platform where anything is possible, and big releases could happen at any time. You better subscribe so you don’t miss out!
We don’t know how many people have watched The Cloverfield Paradox, but viewership numbers are almost beside the point. Netflix bought a movie with a big name attached for a song, and turned it into a smart promotional message for its entire business. It’s the service where anything is possible, and surprises are inevitable. Paramount was able to take a movie that would have lost a significant amount of money and sell it for a profit without pouring any more money down the drain. Everyone wins.
So how did the audiences do? The movie isn’t good, but Netflix audiences likely expect less from a movie that’s streaming on a service they already pay for than from a theatrical release that requires the cost of a few tickets and a night out. Even if people were disappointed in the movie, Netflix is selling the idea that you don’t know where the next blockbuster is coming from on its service, nor when it will arrive.
There is also the possibility that the studio or Netflix has costs that aren’t accounted for in this sort of napkin math, but even if that’s the case everyone did the right thing to minimize their losses and make the most out of what they had.
You may not have liked The Cloverfield Paradox, but the money was well spent if you signed up or continue to pay for the service while hoping that the next movie released on Netflix is better.