If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New Musical Express)   Here's how much Netflix wasted on the shiatburger that is The Cloverfield Paradox   ( nme.com) divider line
    More: Followup, Cloverfield Paradox, Film, critical disdain, Super Bowl, viral success, sci-fi movie, eMarketer's Paul, Zhang Ziyi  
•       •       •

3154 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 08 Feb 2018 at 9:20 AM (23 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



103 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-02-08 09:06:32 AM  
Come on, it was that bad.  Sure, 90% of the science was horrible, but it had a good cast and was a fun enough sci-fi B-movie.
 
2018-02-08 09:07:57 AM  

NeoCortex42: Come on, it was that bad.  Sure, 90% of the science was horrible, but it had a good cast and was a fun enough sci-fi B-movie.

wasn't

.  wasn't that bad.

I blame the space-time explosion that happened in their timeline for messing up my typing.
 
2018-02-08 09:25:36 AM  
Can anyone tell me what happened to this poor woman?

img.fark.netView Full Size


I don't want to give them the click.
 
2018-02-08 09:28:08 AM  
On the bright side, since they own it they can always repurpose it into an episode of MST3K later.

Stranger Things/Mystery Science Theater 3000 Riff [HD] | Netflix
Youtube RkOMAQAcBKE
 
2018-02-08 09:28:27 AM  

NeoCortex42: Come on, it was that bad.  Sure, 90% of the science was horrible, but it had a good cast and was a fun enough sci-fi B-movie.


I was looking forward to checking it out but man it is catching shiat.  I does look like it has a decent cast.  I was surprised to see Asian Gong Li clone (sans breasts), Ziyi Zhang in there but  - David Oyelowo...Daniel Bruhl, Chris ODowd and Gugu (giggity) MbathaRaw (giggity).  When I saw the preview I expected good things.
 
2018-02-08 09:37:46 AM  
I watched it.  It's enjoyable if you don't get into a tizzy about every detail.

/sentient arm
//precessional gravity
 
2018-02-08 09:38:50 AM  

Wellon Dowd: Can anyone tell me what happened to this poor woman?

[img.fark.net image 394x341]

I don't want to give them the click.


I've been wondering about Malia Obama's 500-yard yacht ever since my Barefark expired.
 
2018-02-08 09:40:25 AM  
It not like they haven't wasted for more money on Adam Sandler garbage already. Some of their tv series are fairly decent, but whomever making the choices for movie projects seem to be clinically insane.
 
2018-02-08 09:41:10 AM  

Angry Buddha: I watched it.  It's enjoyable if you don't get into a tizzy about every detail.

/sentient arm
//precessional gravity


Everything is good when you set the bar low enough.
 
2018-02-08 09:44:14 AM  
The cloverfeild movies before this were both solid b movies, as is this one.
 
2018-02-08 09:51:59 AM  

Travis_Bickle: Angry Buddha: I watched it.  It's enjoyable if you don't get into a tizzy about every detail.

/sentient arm
//precessional gravity

Everything is good when you set the bar low enough.


User name checks out.
 
2018-02-08 09:53:54 AM  
It wasn't great but it wasn't as bad as people seem to be saying. It's considerably better than most of the original sci-fi content Netflix puts out.
 
2018-02-08 09:56:59 AM  
I would honestly never have watched the movie without the Netflix and Cloverfield links.

It was a bad movie. It had great actors, yeah, but it was badly scripted, the scenes added to create the connexion with Cloverfield were clumsy, there weren't any real plot, it was just a list of horror sci-fi cliches put end to end.
 
2018-02-08 09:58:56 AM  
Oh, fark off subby.
Don't you have another petition to start somewhere about a movie that destroyed your childhood or something?
 
2018-02-08 10:00:45 AM  

Zombie DJ: Oh, fark off subby.
Don't you have another petition to start somewhere about a movie that destroyed your childhood or something?


Dude, calm down. It's the movie he insulted, not you.
 
2018-02-08 10:04:48 AM  
My hypothesis is the director secretly gave each actor a slightly different script; not enough to be noticeable upon filming, but obvious after they're all put together in post
 
2018-02-08 10:07:44 AM  

mcreel: My hypothesis is the director secretly gave each actor a slightly different script; not enough to be noticeable upon filming, but obvious after they're all put together in post


It's actually a meta commentary on the parallel universe theory.  Every actor is actually in a slightly different film.  Brilliant.  Sounds like Christopher Nolan's next big film.
 
2018-02-08 10:08:12 AM  

UberDave: NeoCortex42: Come on, it was that bad.  Sure, 90% of the science was horrible, but it had a good cast and was a fun enough sci-fi B-movie.

I was looking forward to checking it out but man it is catching shiat.  I does look like it has a decent cast.  I was surprised to see Asian Gong Li clone (sans breasts), Ziyi Zhang in there but  - David Oyelowo...Daniel Bruhl, Chris ODowd and Gugu (giggity) MbathaRaw (giggity).  When I saw the preview I expected good things.


Turn your brain off and enjoy it.  Nobody's pretending it's Oscar-worthy.
 
2018-02-08 10:09:14 AM  
I find people with 'perfect' as their minimum standard for 'good' or 'acceptable' are the most miserable bastards out there; regardless of the item in question or its objective merits.
 
2018-02-08 10:10:34 AM  
It was dumb fun.

As I posted in an earlier thread...

Farkers: The science in this movie is wrong!

Fark's favorite movie:
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-02-08 10:11:21 AM  

Malacon: It wasn't great but it wasn't as bad as people seem to be saying. It's considerably better than most of the original sci-fi content Netflix puts out.


The only reason it's gotten as many headlines as it has is because of the way it was released.  If it had been a Netflix release from the beginning and had a normal announcement-release timeline, it would have just come and gone like so many other shows and movies.  Netflix tried something new with the surprise release, and you know what, we're talking about it.  Talking about it at least once a day since it came out.  So I wouldn't say it's a total failure.
 
2018-02-08 10:12:54 AM  

NeoCortex42: mcreel: My hypothesis is the director secretly gave each actor a slightly different script; not enough to be noticeable upon filming, but obvious after they're all put together in post

It's actually a meta commentary on the parallel universe theory.  Every actor is actually in a slightly different film.  Brilliant.  Sounds like Christopher Nolan's next big film.


If the director came out and said that is what he did I'd respect the hell out of trying that.
 
2018-02-08 10:15:29 AM  

NeoCortex42: mcreel: My hypothesis is the director secretly gave each actor a slightly different script; not enough to be noticeable upon filming, but obvious after they're all put together in post

It's actually a meta commentary on the parallel universe theory.  Every actor is actually in a slightly different film.  Brilliant.  Sounds like Christopher Nolan's next big film.


shiat!
Should I have trademarked this?
 
2018-02-08 10:16:03 AM  
Considering I've enjoyed watching 50s sci-fi movies as long as I've been watching movies, there's no reason I can't still enjoy stuff like this.  The only difference is that the effects and acting are better.

Hell, I'd be happy if Netflix created a whole series of B-movie selections and went all Full Moon Pictures in addition to their normal prestige shows.
 
kab
2018-02-08 10:16:29 AM  
50 million?

It'd probably cost way less than that for you to fix your abysmal GUI, and give users the option to not see your incessant, pain in the ass autoplay nonsense.
 
2018-02-08 10:26:40 AM  
Elizabeth Debicki is gorgeous.
 
2018-02-08 10:27:17 AM  
I still liked it.
 
2018-02-08 10:28:14 AM  
Every movie isn't made for everyone.
There was room for improvement but the movie's goal is be entertaining not a tutorial on how to make a space station and travel to alternate realities.
 
2018-02-08 10:29:01 AM  
I saw the ad, said to myself, sweet - new sci fi movie. Watched it and enjoyed it.
 
2018-02-08 10:33:27 AM  
Just as long as Netflix doesn't become the dumping ground for movies that go off the rails in production and end up losing their chance in the theaters.
 
2018-02-08 10:35:36 AM  
This is why we can't have nice -crap- things!
 
2018-02-08 10:41:05 AM  
Gotta break a few eggs to ride the Bojack.
 
2018-02-08 10:42:15 AM  
$50 million for something I'll never watch could have been used to acquire a huge film library. Before all these originals, Netflix had a better film library.
 
2018-02-08 10:42:16 AM  

foo monkey: UberDave: NeoCortex42: Come on, it was that bad.  Sure, 90% of the science was horrible, but it had a good cast and was a fun enough sci-fi B-movie.

I was looking forward to checking it out but man it is catching shiat.  I does look like it has a decent cast.  I was surprised to see Asian Gong Li clone (sans breasts), Ziyi Zhang in there but  - David Oyelowo...Daniel Bruhl, Chris ODowd and Gugu (giggity) MbathaRaw (giggity).  When I saw the preview I expected good things.

Turn your brain off and enjoy it.  Nobody's pretending it's Oscar-worthy.


I'm not thinking it is going to be either but you know there's a subjective limit to "turning your brain off" right?  It's like when "The Prince" popped up on Netflix.  Try turning your brain off and getting through that one.
 
2018-02-08 10:47:45 AM  

TheMysteriousStranger: $50 million for something I'll never watch could have been used to acquire a huge film library. Before all these originals, Netflix had a better film library.


Netflix is going to spend $8 billion on programming next year.  It was worth $50 mm to them just to have JJ Abrams smile when Netflix calls.
 
2018-02-08 10:51:39 AM  
I watched it Tuesday night and enjoyed it.  I wasn't big screen worthy but I liked it.  I hope there's more to come that continues telling the story.
 
2018-02-08 10:52:35 AM  

TheMysteriousStranger: $50 million for something I'll never watch could have been used to acquire a huge film library. Before all these originals, Netflix had a better film library.


I don't know about that.  Part of the reason for Netflix going hard into original programming is that it's probably becoming cheaper than licensing other material.  As Netflix has gotten more successful, rights holders have been asking for more and more in order to maintain that sizable library.  On top of that, you now have other content creators creating their own distribution services (Disney, CBS, etc) and eventually pulling all of their content from Netflix.

So odds are $50 million isn't going to buy the huge library you think it would.
 
2018-02-08 10:53:48 AM  
There were some good concepts in there, it just felt like it was half-baked and rushed out the door.  If they went a little more towards a living hell like Event Horizon, that would have made it more interesting.  They foreshadowed the danger of multiple higher dimensions interacting with each other, but failed to show enough of that reality.
 
2018-02-08 10:56:44 AM  
I think the bigger problem is Paramount not knowing what the fark it wants from the Cloverfield franchise.  If you want a cohesive series of anthology films, then you need to pick up projects much earlier in pre-production and develop them as such instead of shoe-horning in references and a new ending.  If you want to use the brand to rescue decent, but smaller genre films that would otherwise be lost, then present them as-is and don't worry about the connective tissue of the franchise.
 
2018-02-08 11:04:58 AM  
I liked it. If you want "hard sci-fi" where everything is painstakingly accurate, then stick to something like "The Martian" or "The Expanse". The average Netflix viewer is just like the average anything, and that includes scientific literacy-if you want to be able to introduce some cool ideas, keep the plot moving, and keep the average person engaged, then it was just the right mix of a decent sci-fi plot, decent acting, and decent CGI.
 
2018-02-08 11:19:22 AM  

robertus: Wellon Dowd: Can anyone tell me what happened to this poor woman?

[img.fark.net image 394x341]

I don't want to give them the click.

I've been wondering about Malia Obama's 500-yard yacht ever since my Barefark expired.


I heard she bought it from Rayne Summers.
 
2018-02-08 11:25:35 AM  
Watched part of it.  Wasn't as bad as that web-site.
 
2018-02-08 11:39:16 AM  

UberDave: foo monkey: UberDave: NeoCortex42: Come on, it was that bad.  Sure, 90% of the science was horrible, but it had a good cast and was a fun enough sci-fi B-movie.

I was looking forward to checking it out but man it is catching shiat.  I does look like it has a decent cast.  I was surprised to see Asian Gong Li clone (sans breasts), Ziyi Zhang in there but  - David Oyelowo...Daniel Bruhl, Chris ODowd and Gugu (giggity) MbathaRaw (giggity).  When I saw the preview I expected good things.

Turn your brain off and enjoy it.  Nobody's pretending it's Oscar-worthy.

I'm not thinking it is going to be either but you know there's a subjective limit to "turning your brain off" right?  It's like when "The Prince" popped up on Netflix.  Try turning your brain off and getting through that one.


It's the hand wave response that always gets used to defend crappy movies.

- it's a popcorn movie
- just turn your brain off
- they all don't have to be Citizen Kane...yadda yadda yadda

It's not a credible opinion and never has been.
 
2018-02-08 11:42:17 AM  

capn' fun: I liked it. If you want "hard sci-fi" where everything is painstakingly accurate, then stick to something like "The Martian" or "The Expanse". The average Netflix viewer is just like the average anything, and that includes scientific literacy-if you want to be able to introduce some cool ideas, keep the plot moving, and keep the average person engaged, then it was just the right mix of a decent sci-fi plot, decent acting, and decent CGI.


There's no wind storms on Mars.
 
2018-02-08 11:51:54 AM  
Watched it, enjoyed it, made fun of some of the silly stuff, and went to bed.

Wasn't expecting an award winning master class in film so I was not disappointed very much at all.  Not real sure why their is so much class A butt hurt about third film in a ether you like or don't like it series of movies that went straight to streaming release.
 
2018-02-08 11:58:06 AM  

TheMarchHare: capn' fun: I liked it. If you want "hard sci-fi" where everything is painstakingly accurate, then stick to something like "The Martian" or "The Expanse". The average Netflix viewer is just like the average anything, and that includes scientific literacy-if you want to be able to introduce some cool ideas, keep the plot moving, and keep the average person engaged, then it was just the right mix of a decent sci-fi plot, decent acting, and decent CGI.

There's no wind storms on Mars.


img.fark.netView Full Size
They're not at speeds as high as here on Earth, but then again Mars' atmosphere is something like 1% of Earth's. Or all of that erosion and formation could also be caused by alien chemtrails. Whichever.
 
2018-02-08 12:01:17 PM  
It was ok. Shoe horning it to the Cloverfield universe was gay.
 
2018-02-08 12:01:49 PM  
I watched and thought the movie was decent.  Am I wrong to say that it is supposed to be a prequel to the original movie?  Seems to fit together looking at it that way and trying to explain how the first movie happened.
 
2018-02-08 12:03:12 PM  

capn' fun: TheMarchHare: capn' fun: I liked it. If you want "hard sci-fi" where everything is painstakingly accurate, then stick to something like "The Martian" or "The Expanse". The average Netflix viewer is just like the average anything, and that includes scientific literacy-if you want to be able to introduce some cool ideas, keep the plot moving, and keep the average person engaged, then it was just the right mix of a decent sci-fi plot, decent acting, and decent CGI.

There's no wind storms on Mars.

[img.fark.net image 850x850]They're not at speeds as high as here on Earth, but then again Mars' atmosphere is something like 1% of Earth's. Or all of that erosion and formation could also be caused by alien chemtrails. Whichever.


Enh. He's whinging about the wind storm setup and tipping of the launch vehicle which would not be possible in reality due to the density of the atmosphere even though this was known from the begining and explained by the author directly.
 
2018-02-08 12:05:33 PM  

Evilnissan: Watched it, enjoyed it, made fun of some of the silly stuff, and went to bed.

Wasn't expecting an award winning master class in film so I was not disappointed very much at all.  Not real sure why their is so much class A butt hurt about third film in a ether you like or don't like it series of movies that went straight to streaming release.


It's because there's a lot of hate out there for JJ Abrams and Bad Robot for the alleged ruination of Star Trek, Star Wars, and everything else in life that some fan boys consider to be holy canon. They want Abrams to be banned from all things science fiction for his heresy. And lens flare.

They've actually got a legitimate gripe with the lens flare.
 
Displayed 50 of 103 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report