Tuesday, November 20, 2007

A Breakdown Of The New Cloverfield Trailer


What was previously known simply as 1-18-08 is now revealed as Cloverfield which was at first the working title but now seems to be the real title which may have always been the original title but 'they' made us think it was the working title. Confused? You should be, Cloverfield is after all produced by J.J. Abrams, the genius behind the mindfuck that is the television show Lost. There are many layers to Lost. Lots of loose ends and double meanings and I tried to keep up for about a week but then got lost myself.

Judging from what I've seen thus far from Cloverfield, it looks like J.J. Abrams is up to the same shit. What is it that's causing the huge explosions? What has ripped the head off the Statue Of Liberty? Is it just in New York, the United States or the whole world? I guess we'll have to wait until 1-18-08 if that is indeed the date of its release. It might be coordinates to place that tells us what's next. Who knows? But fear not, I am going to break down the new Cloverfield trailer for you so that everything thus far about the movie will be crystal clear.


Cloverfield is produced by Paramount. Or maybe that's just what they want you to believe. Maybe Cloverfield wasn't produced at all, whatever that means.



Area formerly known as "Central Park". So the entire movie is an amateur video when 'something' attacked and now "Central Park" and maybe all of New York, The United States or the world doesn't exist anymore. Or after this video somebody said "you know, I'm kinda done with the name Central Park. Let's try something else, like Middle Park."


There's a big explosion in the middle of New York. Something big had to have caused that. Something big and something pissed.


And whatever that 'something' is, it's got something against the Statue Of Liberty because it just tossed Liberty's head like it was a tennis ball.


This is kind of hard to see but it is actually one building resting on another. So that means there is a lot of destruction going on. But it could also mean that the building is just tired and needs to lean on another building which would suggest that buildings are not buildings at all, but real living organisms. Maybe that's what the 'something' is, it's just a big building that hates all the other buildings.


A camera card stating that J.J. Abrams is producing this which in effect means that you can't trust shit. The whole thing you've watched thus far could not be the movie at all. It could be a TV movie within the movie or some shit like that. And what's with that name anyways? Maybe J.J. Abrams isn't producing at all. Wait, if I just move the letters around here a bit... there. The movie is actually produced by A.M. JABRJS. Or is that A.J. JAMBRS. Now we're making some sense.

From the trailer, this is Rob. Rob seems to be a nice guy and Rob is going away somewheres until this 'something' happened to New York. Here he's panicked and on the phone asking "where's Beth?" So who is Beth? Is that short for Elizabeth? Elizabeth Hurley? Is it a guy named Beth? Or is it the nickname of that 'something' that is blowing up New York? Maybe Beth isn't a person or a thing at all? Maybe it's a code that unlocks an underground labyrinth of scientists that are conducting this gigantic terrorist experiment on New York to see how the people will really react.


These are people running towards a light. Oh, I get it. They're all dead. Now it makes sense.


This is a black frame. But maybe not. Maybe it's a nude woman in a tall glass of Coca-Cola telling me to buy more material goods. Suddenly I want a large order of Popcorn and some Junior Mints really bad.


Now it seems people are running away from the light. No, don't run away from the light. Go to the light. And it looks like that woman is going to throw up. Is the light making you sick, honey? It's a sickly light. Don't go into the light! Stay away from the light!


The army is involved. But wait, this guys face is blurry. Which means that the tape we are watching which is the movie has already been tampered. The government has gone in and made changes. What aren't we seeing here? Or maybe that guy is just deformed and it looks like pixels. Dude, that's some bad acne.


There's that damn light again. And now nobody knows what to do. Should they run to it? Should they run away from it? Will it make them vomit? Shit, I don't know.


This could be one of two things. Two military men dressed in haz-mat suits hauling away a woman which means that this 'something' in the movie may or may not be spreading something. Or this could just be two wild bears having their way with a woman behind a sheet of plastic.


Here is the military firing several shots at this 'something' which suggests it is flying or it's really tall.


Tanks are involved which means that guns won't do the job to this 'something' so they need to bring in the bigger firepower.


These women turn around to what sounds like bug sounds and flapping wings and they ask "did you hear that?" Is this 'something' a bug of some kind? A gigantic beetle? A grasshopper? Come on. Tell me it's not a big bug. I think I'll be pissed if this is just a big-ass bug.


And here's the shot of the Statue Of Liberty again without her head. This is supposed to anger us and make us want this gigantic beetle or whatever it is to be dead. Or maybe this 'something' is none other than David Blane and he hasn't removed the head, he has just made it disappear.

Now you can view the new trailer in full and know exactly what is going on all thanks to me. You're welcome.

14 comments:

Ray said...

Excellent work, Piper.

The sad thing is you're probably not far from the truth on this one.

JJ Abrams said...

Shit, I've been sussed. Guess I'd better go into reshoots. Or just kill myself so I don't make anymore crap films and TV shows.

Piper said...

jj,

Shit I knew you read my blog. Welcome.

Burbanked said...

The return of Piper to the From the brains of other bloggers sidebar, ladies and gentlemen!

Frigging hilarious! I wish the ravings of the rest of the Abrams fanboys were half as coherent as this post.

Sheamus the... said...

Blair Witch meets Godzilla.

It will be cool I think. When watching the trailer myself in slow mo I have come to a couple conclusions. The main actors die in a Helicopter crash. Those bear suits are indeed men in suits...its the creature audio that throws you off.
I love LOST but we'll see what JJ does with Trek.

Moviezzz said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Piper said...

burbanked,

Yeaaaaaah!



Moviezzz,

Snakes On A Plane might be a little harsh and I waver on this movie. I watched Lost at the beginning but felt that it fell way off last season. I will have to say watching this trailer again, I got pretty excited for it. I mean, what the hell else am I going to look forward to in the middle of January - an ice storm?

Neil Sarver said...

I dunno... I'm not a J.J. Abrams fan! All the critics fawned over "Felicity"... it had some potential at first, but turned to garbage within a few episodes. All the critics fawned over "Alias"... it had potential at first, but turned to garbage within a couple of episodes and then just kept getting even worse.

So I've never really watched "Lost"... fool me once and all of that...

But then, in practical terms, this is a movie written by some writer for his shows and directed by the guy who did The Pallbearer, it's unclear how strong Abrams' producerial role may be.

Whatever one's feelings on him or the trailer or whatever... I still think the January release date absolutely guarantees that it will be terrible.

Piper said...

Neil,

You saw this as support for the movie? Hmmmm. I guess I wasn't sarcastic enough.

I was a fan of felicity for the first couple of years. I saw Alias once and thought it so rotten that I never watched it again. I thought miIII was good fun - even with Tom Cruise. And Lost started out as some really creepy show that was going somewhere, but when I left it over a year ago it was a damn mess.

Still, this is a big monster movie and I love those so JJ Abrams or not, I guess I would have to admit I'm at least curious about it.

Stacie Ponder said...

I'm not an Abrams cronie- I've seen two episodes of Lost and they both left me decidedly uncaring- but this has got me intrigued. That shot of the mysterious explosion far off is effin' KILLER.

Neil Sarver said...

No, I didn't really see it as support. I was more responding to the back and forth curious tone of the comments.

Frankly, the marketing continues to be good... and I'd like it to be good, because, well, as you say, big monster movie... but the January thing still seals it for me.

Joe Valdez said...

Pat! Who cares? Unless this movie ends with the real life alien autopsy footage from Roswell, reveals who really killed JFK, or features the return of Andy Kaufman from the grave, there's no way in hell it can live up to its massive hype.

This is the problem I have with J.J. Abrams, a negligible filmmaker and clever writer who it would appear really wants to be William Castle. I thought Felicity was pretty good, but what possible series finale could you write for Lost that would satisfy anybody? If David Lynch couldn't pull this off in Twin Peaks, I doubt that Abrams or his writing staff are going to be able to placate the pathological devotion and scrutiny of the show's waning fans.

Piper said...

Joe,

Good reference to Twin Peaks.

You make a good point but I'm not sure you can blame a movie for creating hype around it. Of course they have to deliver a good product and one wonders if that could ever happen, but you still have to create buzz about your movie. Especially with the way Hollywood runs things by front loading everything and only keeping a movie in the theaters for a couple of weeks.

* (asterisk) said...

Also, to be fair to Lynch, the end of Twin Peaks was only intended as a season finale, not a series finale. The show was then axed before the next season went into production.

Lost bored me after about four episodes anyway. Alias took a little longer, maybe an entire season. Abrams is dull.