Jump to content

Clover (creature): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
DurinsBane87 (talk | contribs)
3,093 edits
Undid revision 189801274 by 24.113.188.152 (talk)
→Concept and creation: restore blanked sections, minus physical description
Line 24: Line 24:
Abrams described the creature as a "baby" who has been underwater for thousands of years that emerges "confused, disoriented, and irritable".<ref name=notes /> Goddard pointed out the lack of explanation in the film of the creature's origin was deliberate. Reeves described the creature's reaction to its surroundings, "It’s this new environment that it finds frightening." To detail this, Reeves suggested the addition of white in the creature's eyes so it would look similar to an animal like a horse being spooked.<ref name=notes>{{cite news | author= | url=http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/spotlights/cloverfieldnotes.doc | title=Production notes | publisher=[[Rotten Tomatoes]] | date=[[2008-01-10]] | accessdate=2008-01-23 }}</ref> The filmmakers also came up with the idea of parasites since the film could not realistically have scenes between the human protagonists and the enormous creature.<ref name=notes/>
Abrams described the creature as a "baby" who has been underwater for thousands of years that emerges "confused, disoriented, and irritable".<ref name=notes /> Goddard pointed out the lack of explanation in the film of the creature's origin was deliberate. Reeves described the creature's reaction to its surroundings, "It’s this new environment that it finds frightening." To detail this, Reeves suggested the addition of white in the creature's eyes so it would look similar to an animal like a horse being spooked.<ref name=notes>{{cite news | author= | url=http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/spotlights/cloverfieldnotes.doc | title=Production notes | publisher=[[Rotten Tomatoes]] | date=[[2008-01-10]] | accessdate=2008-01-23 }}</ref> The filmmakers also came up with the idea of parasites since the film could not realistically have scenes between the human protagonists and the enormous creature.<ref name=notes/>


===Character design===
Although "just a baby," <ref name=baby/> the massive creature has a high resistance to projectile weaponry. Shells from [[M-1 Abrams]], [[AT4]] rockets, missiles from [[F/A-18]]s, [[MLRS]] and [[Mk 82]] bombs from a [[B-2 Bomber]] failed to do any long term damage to it.<ref>{{cite news | author=David Axe | url=http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/01/cloverfield-mon.html | title=''Cloverfield'' Monster Versus Vacuum Bomb | publisher=[[Wired News]] | date=[[2008-01-22]] | accessdate=2008-01-23 }}</ref>

The creature carries smaller parasites which it sheds as part of a 'post-birth ritual.' Abrams described the parasites as "horrifying, dog-sized creatures that just scatter around the city and add to the nightmare of the evening." Reeves added, "The parasites have a voracious, rabid, bounding nature, but they also have a crab-like crawl. They have the viciousness of a dog, but with the ability to climb walls and stick to objects."<ref name=notes/>

Artist Neville Page, in response to claims that the design of creature was similar to that of the creature of the 2006 South Korean film ''[[The Host (film)|The Host]]'', said, "They are [similar] in that they ravage and seem to originate from the water, but the end results are quite different. However, when I finally saw some of the concept art, there were some very obvious similarities. But then again, I think that we were both channeling similar biological possibilities."<ref name=vfx/>

==Critical analysis==
Reviewing the film ''Cloverfield'', the ''[[San Jose Mercury News]]'' described the creature as "a monster for the [[MySpace]] generation".<ref>{{cite news | author=Lewis Wallace | url=http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/01/cloverfield-tak.html | title=''Cloverfield'' Takes a Bite out of Box Office | publisher=[[Wired News]] | date=[[2008-01-19]] | accessdate=2008-01-22 }}</ref> Reviewer [[James Berardinelli]] noted, "The movie follows the ''[[Jaws (film)|Jaws]]'' rule that monsters are usually more intimidating when they are shown infrequently and only in brief glimpses."<ref>{{cite news | author=James Berardinelli | url=http://www.reelviews.net/movies/c/cloverfield.html | title=Review: Cloverfield | publisher=Reelviews.net | accessdate=2008-01-22 }}</ref> Amy Biancolli of the ''[[Houston Chronicle]]'' described the creature, "He retains an air of mystery — a monstrous ''je ne sais quoi'' that makes him all the freakier."<ref>{{cite news | author=Amy Biancolli | url=http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ent/movies/reviews/5433986.html | title=An efficiently gripping sci-fi/horror romp | publisher=[[Houston Chronicle]] | date=[[2008-01-17]] | accessdate=2008-01-22 }}</ref> Richard Corliss of ''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]'' complained of the recycled elements of the creature, such as its emergence mimicking the 1954 film ''[[Godzilla (1954 film)|Godzilla]]'' and its little crab creatures being similar to the "toy meanies" from the 1984 film ''[[Gremlins]]''. Corliss said of one of the creature's personal characteristics, "When the main monster opens its mouth, you pretty much know there'll be a second, [[Xenomorph (Alien)|Alien]]-like set of teeth."<ref>{{cite news | author=Richard Corliss | url=http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1704366-1,00.html | title=Corliss on Cloverfield: The Blair Witch Reject | publisher=[[Time (magazine)|Time]] | date=[[2008-01-16]] | accessdate=2008-01-22 }}</ref>

Roger Ebert of the ''[[Chicago Sun-Times]]'' expressed his acceptance of the lack of explanation for the creature's origin, saying, "Which is all right with me after the tiresome opening speeches in so many of the 30 or more ''Godzilla'' films."<ref>{{cite news | author=Roger Ebert | url=http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080117/REVIEWS/801170302 | title=Cloverfield | publisher=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] | date=[[2008-01-17]] | accessdate=2008-01-22 }}</ref> Peter Howell of the ''[[Toronto Star]]'' thought that the main creature was disappointing, while he considered the "mutant spider crabs" that came from it as "way scarier".<ref>{{cite news | author=Peter Howell | url=http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/Movies/article/295166 | title='Cloverfield': Monster smash | publisher=[[Toronto Star]] | date=[[2008-01-18]] | accessdate=2008-01-22 }}</ref> Todd McCarthy of ''[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]'' found that the creature was more reassuring as it appeared more in the film, explaining, "Its very nature as a walking, stalking being suggests it can somehow be killed by conventional means."<ref>{{cite news | author=Todd McCarthy | url=http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117935799.html?categoryid=31&cs=1 | title=Cloverfield Review | publisher=[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]] | date=[[2008-01-16]] | accessdate=2008-01-22 }}</ref> Chris Vognar of the ''[[Dallas Morning News]]'' applauded the creature's appearance as cinematic: "The thrill here isn't in the critter but in how it's revealed. First we see what it's capable of. Then we catch a tail here, a limb there. The spider-crabs announce their presence with authority. Then, once the opening acts are done, and Manhattan is in a shambles, the big guy is ready for his close-up."<ref>{{cite news | author=Chris Vognar | url=http://www.guidelive.com/portal/page?_pageid=33,97283&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL&item_id=62302 | title=Cloverfield | publisher=[[Dallas Morning News]] | date=[[2008-01-18]] | accessdate=2008-01-22 }}</ref>


==Merchandise==
==Merchandise==

Revision as of 05:20, 8 February 2008

Template:Infobox fictional creature

"Cloverfield" is the fictional creature that first appeared in the 2008 film Cloverfield. The name was designated to the otherwise unnamed creature by the fictional universe's U.S. Department of Defense. After the film's release, the monster became the subject of a four-part manga series, Cloverfield/Kishin, which serves as a prequel to the film. The creature of Cloverfield was originally conceived by producer J. J. Abrams during a trip to Japan and was designed by artist Neville Page.

Appearances

The fictional monster of Cloverfield was first refered to in the viral marketing campaign for the 2008 film, including a recording of its roar, foreign news clips about a monster attack, and sonar images.[1]

The creature made its first full appearance in Cloverfield, where it was seen rampaging through New York City and being combated by the United States military.[2] It also appears in a four-part manga series Cloverfield/Kishin by Yoshiki Togawa, which serves as a prequel to the film.[3] In the manga, a connection is implied between the human protagonist Kishin Aiba, his dead mother, and the creature.[4]

Concept and creation

Producer J. J. Abrams had visited a toy store in Japan with his son while promoting Mission: Impossible III, discovering numerous toys of the monster Godzilla. The producer decided that America should have its own monster, dismissing King Kong as "adorable". Abrams explained, "I wanted something that was just insane and intense."[5] The creature was introduced in the 2008 film Cloverfield directed by Matt Reeves and written by Drew Goddard.

The creature was designed by artist Neville Page. He sought a biological rationale for the creature, though many of his ideas would not show up on screen. Page designed the creature as immature and suffering from "separation anxiety". He compared the creature to a rampaging elephant, saying "there's nothing scarier than something huge that's spooked".[6] Page said of the creature's backstory, "For me, one of the most key moments in our collective brainstorming was the choice to make the creature be something that we would empathize with. It is not out there, just killing. It is confused, lost, scared. It's a newborn. Having this be a story point (one that the audience does not know), it allowed for some purposeful choices about its anatomy, movement and, yes, motivations." The creature was visually realized by visual effects supervisor Kevin Blank and Phil Tippett's company Tippett Studio. Blank described the intended goal of the creature, "Rather than the monster having a personality [like Godzilla or King Kong], it's more of an entity or an event."[7]

Abrams described the creature as a "baby" who has been underwater for thousands of years that emerges "confused, disoriented, and irritable".[8] Goddard pointed out the lack of explanation in the film of the creature's origin was deliberate. Reeves described the creature's reaction to its surroundings, "It’s this new environment that it finds frightening." To detail this, Reeves suggested the addition of white in the creature's eyes so it would look similar to an animal like a horse being spooked.[8] The filmmakers also came up with the idea of parasites since the film could not realistically have scenes between the human protagonists and the enormous creature.[8]

Character design

Although "just a baby," [9] the massive creature has a high resistance to projectile weaponry. Shells from M-1 Abrams, AT4 rockets, missiles from F/A-18s, MLRS and Mk 82 bombs from a B-2 Bomber failed to do any long term damage to it.[10]

The creature carries smaller parasites which it sheds as part of a 'post-birth ritual.' Abrams described the parasites as "horrifying, dog-sized creatures that just scatter around the city and add to the nightmare of the evening." Reeves added, "The parasites have a voracious, rabid, bounding nature, but they also have a crab-like crawl. They have the viciousness of a dog, but with the ability to climb walls and stick to objects."[8]

Artist Neville Page, in response to claims that the design of creature was similar to that of the creature of the 2006 South Korean film The Host, said, "They are [similar] in that they ravage and seem to originate from the water, but the end results are quite different. However, when I finally saw some of the concept art, there were some very obvious similarities. But then again, I think that we were both channeling similar biological possibilities."[7]

Critical analysis

Reviewing the film Cloverfield, the San Jose Mercury News described the creature as "a monster for the MySpace generation".[11] Reviewer James Berardinelli noted, "The movie follows the Jaws rule that monsters are usually more intimidating when they are shown infrequently and only in brief glimpses."[12] Amy Biancolli of the Houston Chronicle described the creature, "He retains an air of mystery — a monstrous je ne sais quoi that makes him all the freakier."[13] Richard Corliss of Time complained of the recycled elements of the creature, such as its emergence mimicking the 1954 film Godzilla and its little crab creatures being similar to the "toy meanies" from the 1984 film Gremlins. Corliss said of one of the creature's personal characteristics, "When the main monster opens its mouth, you pretty much know there'll be a second, Alien-like set of teeth."[14]

Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times expressed his acceptance of the lack of explanation for the creature's origin, saying, "Which is all right with me after the tiresome opening speeches in so many of the 30 or more Godzilla films."[15] Peter Howell of the Toronto Star thought that the main creature was disappointing, while he considered the "mutant spider crabs" that came from it as "way scarier".[16] Todd McCarthy of Variety found that the creature was more reassuring as it appeared more in the film, explaining, "Its very nature as a walking, stalking being suggests it can somehow be killed by conventional means."[17] Chris Vognar of the Dallas Morning News applauded the creature's appearance as cinematic: "The thrill here isn't in the critter but in how it's revealed. First we see what it's capable of. Then we catch a tail here, a limb there. The spider-crabs announce their presence with authority. Then, once the opening acts are done, and Manhattan is in a shambles, the big guy is ready for his close-up."[18]

Merchandise

Based on the success of Cloverfield, which earned over $46 million over its opening weekend in the United States and Canadian box office, the toy company Hasbro began accepting orders for a 14-inch collectible toy figure of the monster and its parasites to be shipped to fans by September 30 2008.[19]

References

  1. ^ Michelle Kung (2008-01-13). "The marketing of 'Cloverfield' has been as mysterious as the movie itself". Boston Globe. Retrieved 2008-01-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  2. ^ Matt Reeves (Director) (2008). Cloverfield (Film). United States: Paramount Pictures.
  3. ^ Yoshiki Togawa (2008). クローバーフィールド／ＫＩＳＨＩＮ. Kadokawa Shoten. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |other= ignored (|others= suggested) (help)
  4. ^ ""CLOVERFIELD" MANGA OFFERS MORE CLUES, QUESTIONS". Comic Book Resources. 2008-01-15. Retrieved 2008-01-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  5. ^ Alex Billington (2007-07-26). "Comic-Con Live: Paramount Panel - Star Trek, Indiana Jones IV, and More…". FirstShowing.net. Retrieved 2008-01-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  6. ^ Max Evry (2008-01-21). "Reeves Runs Merrily Through Cloverfield". ComingSoon.net. Retrieved 2008-01-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  7. ^ a b Tara DiLullo Bennett (2008-01-22). "Cloverfield: Reinventing the Monster Movie". VFXWorld. Retrieved 2008-01-28. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  8. ^ a b c d "Production notes". Rotten Tomatoes. 2008-01-10. Retrieved 2008-01-23. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  9. ^ Cite error: The named reference baby was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  10. ^ David Axe (2008-01-22). "Cloverfield Monster Versus Vacuum Bomb". Wired News. Retrieved 2008-01-23. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  11. ^ Lewis Wallace (2008-01-19). "Cloverfield Takes a Bite out of Box Office". Wired News. Retrieved 2008-01-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  12. ^ James Berardinelli. "Review: Cloverfield". Reelviews.net. Retrieved 2008-01-22.
  13. ^ Amy Biancolli (2008-01-17). "An efficiently gripping sci-fi/horror romp". Houston Chronicle. Retrieved 2008-01-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  14. ^ Richard Corliss (2008-01-16). "Corliss on Cloverfield: The Blair Witch Reject". Time. Retrieved 2008-01-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  15. ^ Roger Ebert (2008-01-17). "Cloverfield". Chicago Sun-Times. Retrieved 2008-01-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  16. ^ Peter Howell (2008-01-18). "'Cloverfield': Monster smash". Toronto Star. Retrieved 2008-01-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  17. ^ Todd McCarthy (2008-01-16). "Cloverfield Review". Variety. Retrieved 2008-01-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  18. ^ Chris Vognar (2008-01-18). "Cloverfield". Dallas Morning News. Retrieved 2008-01-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  19. ^ Marc Graser (2008-01-21). "Hasbro toys with 'Cloverfield' monster". Variety. Retrieved 2008-01-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Clover_(creature)&oldid=189900588"