The Instigator
libertyforall
Pro (for)
Losing
32 Points
The Contender
Kleptin
Con (against)
Winning
34 Points

Cloverfield was a great movie.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/18/2008 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,683 times Debate No: 1951
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (4)
Votes (14)

 

libertyforall

Pro

This movie was great. I am so tred of hearing people complain about it, and I am especially tired of hearing why they didn't like. Anyone who went to this movie thinking it was going to be a Godzilla meets youtube movie obviously was clueless. This movie was meant to feel realistic and it did. Ask yourself, what would you do in the same situation? Maybe you would have said **** the one person you love but I might of done the same as Rob (the main character). The monster was just awesome and definently worth more than I expected. Everyone should of known that this was going to be similar to the Blair Witch Project but it is obvious that people who hated that movie went to see this one. If you didn't like Cloverfield I would really like to hear real reasons why. Not, "The camera made me dizzy!" or "OMG!, SO MANY QUESTIONS WHERE LEFT UNANSWERED!" or any other stupid reason, you should have had a pretty good idea about what this movie was going to be before you went to see it. It was after all produced by J.J. Abrams...
Kleptin

Con

In my opinion, Cloverfield was a "good" movie, not a "great" movie.

I have to say I was extremely impressed with the cinematography style, it made it truly stand out in its genre because most CGI monster movies use bird-eye views or classic theater styles in order to show off the effects. However, this movie managed to incorporate everything while keeping it frighteningly realistic. The effects and action scenes were also very well choreographed, tying in with the overall theme of "realistic".

The positives end there, however.

The biggest problem, I felt, was with the acting. In a word, it was terrible. Hunt's little quips, though on the most part entertaining, really seemed inappropriate at times. Though it can be argued that he makes jokes in order to calm himself (he said so himself) it happens to the extent and frequency that you know the directer is forcing him and that it isn't natural.

Beth was a terrible actor as well. Her acting was terribly forced, and I feel that the directors had her cry a lot not so that the movie would seem more realistic, but to cover for her inability to act.

Marlena was fairly good overall, but it bothered me that she could go from being supported in a state of helplessness to supporting another in less than 15 seconds (when they decide to go save Beth). In addition, she had huge gaping wounds that would cripple a 6 foot tall body-builder in her position, and she seemed perfectly okay comparatively.

I found the plot far too predictable and the suspense lacking. It may be our fault for knowing what monster movies are like, but for a monster movie that boasts originality, they should have surprised us more. There are also gaping plot holes, a consequence of having a second person story.

All in all, taking into account the tradeoffs, I would not say it is not a "great" movie, but a "good movie".
Debate Round No. 1
libertyforall

Pro

"The biggest problem, I felt, was with the acting. In a word, it was terrible. Hunt's little quips, though on the most part entertaining, really seemed inappropriate at times. Though it can be argued that he makes jokes in order to calm himself (he said so himself) it happens to the extent and frequency that you know the directer is forcing him and that it isn't natural."

Remember, This movie was supposed to have a real feel to it. We weren't supposed to think that we were watching actors, we were supposed to think we were watching a home-made video of real people and that is how it felt. If you think about it, criticizing the acting is kind of like criticizing the "acting" in your friends vacation video from Florida because he or she did something stupid that you personally would not have said or done.

"Beth was a terrible actor as well. Her acting was terribly forced, and I feel that the directors had her cry a lot not so that the movie would seem more realistic, but to cover for her inability to act."

Ok, this I actually agree with you on but she was hardly actually in the movie anyways. She was the only actor that felt like a reality TV one.

"Marlena was fairly good overall, but it bothered me that she could go from being supported in a state of helplessness to supporting another in less than 15 seconds (when they decide to go save Beth). In addition, she had huge gaping wounds that would cripple a 6 foot tall body-builder in her position, and she seemed perfectly okay comparatively."

Imagine how crazy your emotions would be going in the same situation. Her wounds weren't really that bad when she was first bitten, I've experienced worse in real life. The part where she exploded was simply brilliant.

"I found the plot far too predictable and the suspense lacking. It may be our fault for knowing what monster movies are like, but for a monster movie that boasts originality, they should have surprised us more. There are also gaping plot holes, a consequence of having a second person story."

I would have loved to seen something like a collection of videos gathered of the monster from all around the city but whatever. The story wasn't the most original but what is original now a days? This movie took a fresh, new approach on the genre. The movie was far more original than other recent movies that people have labeled great like Juno, I am Legend and SAW4. I hope we see more from the Cloverfield world from Abrams.

"All in all, taking into account the trade offs, I would not say it is not a "great" movie, but a "good movie"."

I guess if you compare this movie to Star Wars and Lord of the Rings it is just good. However, compared to all the movies released within the last year, this film was great. Also, I think it is an outstanding monster movie.
Kleptin

Con

"Remember, This movie was supposed to have a real feel to it. We weren't supposed to think that we were watching actors, we were supposed to think we were watching a home-made video of real people and that is how it felt. If you think about it, criticizing the acting is kind of like criticizing the "acting" in your friends vacation video from Florida because he or she did something stupid that you personally would not have said or done."

It's not that. It's that the acting was so bad, you could tell they were trying to act natural. Kind of like how a friend pretends to act normal when something is bothering him, do you know what I mean? It's a forced kind of natural.

"Ok, this I actually agree with you on but she was hardly actually in the movie anyways. She was the only actor that felt like a reality TV one."

Okay, I'm glad we agree.

"Imagine how crazy your emotions would be going in the same situation. Her wounds weren't really that bad when she was first bitten, I've experienced worse in real life. The part where she exploded was simply brilliant."

Exactly. If she were that emotionally unstable, she wouldn't have gone from being consoled by Lily to consoling Lily within 15 minutes. She would be too shocked to even care about other people.

"I would have loved to seen something like a collection of videos gathered of the monster from all around the city but whatever. The story wasn't the most original but what is original now a days? This movie took a fresh, new approach on the genre. The movie was far more original than other recent movies that people have labeled great like Juno, I am Legend and SAW4. I hope we see more from the Cloverfield world from Abrams."

It's true, but think of it this way. In a stale old room, you open the window for fresh air and get a face full of more hot, dry air. Cloverfield was supposed to be THE original movie amidst a bunch of typical ones, but the plot was just as cliche. It didn't live up to people's expectations. If it were "great", it would have been great in nearly every way. The fact that the plot was mediocre deprives it of "great" status.

"I guess if you compare this movie to Star Wars and Lord of the Rings it is just good. However, compared to all the movies released within the last year, this film was great. Also, I think it is an outstanding monster movie."

I can't really find any genre in which Cloverfield can be called "great". It's a really good monster movie compared to most monster movies, and the style was really unique. But it did leave me asking "is that...it?"

I would look forward to a sequel though.
Debate Round No. 2
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Daxitarian 9 years ago
Daxitarian
**WARNING: SPOILER BELOW**

I thought the movie struck a nice balance between killing off characters and keeping them alive to please the audience. Sometimes it is tempting to have the characters survive and get together, since the audience has emotional attachment to them; but this erodes at the sense of realism. By having the characters get back together, yet still die, but to die with first saying how they felt about each other, the film had a sort of ironic happy ending (or sad ending, depending how you look at it.)

Also, thinking about how difficult it must be to get all those shots, but to seam them together to make a shaky, documentary style is impressive from a technical standpoint. And I think the hand held camera and all the other shots with digital devices in it really reinforced the theme of the conflict between nature versus man, which is what most monster films are about.

And the fact that the movie reveals little about the monster is a great way to tie in a sequel to a film that already had a brilliant marketing strategy.

If you are arguing about if it was "great" or "good" I think you are just squabbling about semantics.
Posted by Black.Nite17 9 years ago
Black.Nite17
Well i would like to say that to liberty that kleptin said the movies acting didnt seem natural and the characters jokes seemed pushed. which i also find true.
Posted by Acureforthemondays 9 years ago
Acureforthemondays
i just saw that movie. Freakin awesome! Hope the debate turns out well.

cheers
Posted by paul_tigger 9 years ago
paul_tigger
Hey Liberty:

This looks like a fun topic and I will be more than happy to debate you on it, but I cannot debate you on a movie that I have not seen yet. I am an avid monster movie watcher so I will get back on you once I get it.
14 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
libertyforallKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Danielle 8 years ago
Danielle
libertyforallKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by s0m31john 8 years ago
s0m31john
libertyforallKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by kevsext 8 years ago
kevsext
libertyforallKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
libertyforallKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
libertyforallKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Derrida 9 years ago
Derrida
libertyforallKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by eatingpoopiscool 9 years ago
eatingpoopiscool
libertyforallKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by poopfred 9 years ago
poopfred
libertyforallKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Darth_Grievous_42 9 years ago
Darth_Grievous_42
libertyforallKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30