Maybe I'm nuts but *SPOILERS for The Mist and Cloverfield*

Handsome Bob

I'm not putting this whole thing in spoilers so you've been warned. If you haven't seen these films then don;t continue if you don't want have the films spoiled.

I watched The Mist last night and it struck me that the whole schtick was similar to Cloverfield.

• You have the mysterious main monster (s) that you rarely get a clear view of.
• Both monsters seem to have little monsters accompany them.
• These creatures both have ways of infecting humans with their own spawn.
• Both main monsters seem to have a certain resemblance (I'm not saying that they are exactly the same).
• That both films have
  awfully depressing
  endings.
• The main characters in both films have a preoccupied determination to get across town and save their loved ones.

Plus, it's known that JJ Abram's Lost has taken inspiration and influence from other works of Stephen King. So is it just me? Or does anyone think Cloverfield borrowed considerably from Stephen King's The Mist?

Kenno90

Well your right , but there not the only two movies out there that similarities.

take Armageddon and deep impact
antz and bugz life
volcano and dantes peak
the truman show and edtv

the list definitely goes on

anyway i always thought cloverfield had more of a godzilla ring to it ,

MikeC101

LZ5by5 wrote: »

I'm not putting this whole thing in spoilers so you've been warned. If you haven't seen these films then don;t continue if you don't want have the films spoiled.

I watched The Mist last night and it struck me that the whole schtick was similar to Cloverfield.

You have the mysterious main monster (s) that you rarely get a clear view of.

Yeah, but this is just a good technique that's used in both films, and it's prevalent in a lot of horror movies.

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Both monsters seem to have little monsters accompany them.

Hmmm yeah I guess - though Cloverfields are parasites that live on the monster.

LZ5by5 wrote: »

These creatures both have ways of infecting humans with their own spawn.

I don't really remember what the creatures infected anyone as such - in the Mist, the stings killed people, and in Cloverfield the parasites saliva made human blood go haywire (something along those lines) and *kaboom*

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Both main monsters seem to have a certain resemblance (I'm not saying that they are exactly the same).

Maybe, but I think this is just a factor of us not getting a really good look at them.

LZ5by5 wrote: »

That both films have awfully depressing endings.

Yeah, but so have a lot of horror movies.

LZ5by5 wrote: »

The main characters in both films have a preoccupied determination to get across town and save their loved ones.

It's what drives the movies though - wouldn't really work as well if there wasn't something motivating the characters. Similar to a lot of zombie movies.

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Plus, it's known that JJ Abram's Lost has taken inspiration and influence from other works of Stephen King. So is it just me? Or does anyone think Cloverfield borrowed considerably from Stephen King's The Mist?

I don't think there's a huge amount of similarities really, plus with the Mist released at the end of 2007 and Cloverfield opening in January 2008 I'd think it's just not possible - Cloverfield was surely already filmed before the Mist was released.

Edit: Cloverfield filmed mid-June 2007, the Mist released November 2007.

Handsome Bob

MikeC101 wrote: »

Hmmm yeah I guess - though Cloverfields are parasites that live on the monster.

True, but it is never specified how those smaller creatures come to be in The Mist. They could well live on the bigger monsters, maybe anyone who has read the book might be able to help us out! :pac:

I don't really remember what the creatures infected anyone as such - in the Mist, the stings killed people, and in Cloverfield the parasites saliva made human blood go haywire (something along those lines) and *kaboom*

I dunno. I mean in the Mist remember when they are in the Pharmacy and a load of little parasites just burst out of the black guy when he falls to the ground?

Also in Cloverfield, I believe the reason they rushed that girl into the tent was not because the bite made the blood haywire but because something was about to burst out of her and they wanted to contain it before it happened.

Maybe, but I think this is just a factor of us not getting a really good look at them.

Perhaps, but for me personally I feel that I've seen the outlines of both monsters well enough in order to find a correlation.

Yeah, but so are a lot of horror movies.

True.

It's what drives the movies though - wouldn't really work as well if there wasn't something motivating the characters. Similar to a lot of zombie movies.

True again.

I don't think there's a huge amount of similarities really, plus with the Mist released at the end of 2007 and Cloverfield opening in January 2008 I'd think it's just not possible - Cloverfield was surely already filmed before the Mist was released.

Yeah but The Mist is a novel from years ago.

Galvasean

LZ5by5 wrote: »

True, but it is never specified how those smaller creatures come to be in The Mist. They could well live on the bigger monsters, maybe anyone who has read the book might be able to help us out! :pac:

Well at one point

when the massive creature is crossing the road you can see there are smaller creatures inhabitng his underbelly

.
As for where the creatures came from

they all came from the alternate dimension as mentioned re: Project Arrowhead. They seem to be various animals from an alien eco-system. You can see teh dino-bird thingys feeding odd the flying stinger bugs at one point. Its probably a case of when smaller creatures ventured out into the new (our) world, the bigger ones followed them, or something to that effect

MikeC101

LZ5by5 wrote: »

True, but it is never specified how those smaller creatures come to be in The Mist. They could well live on the bigger monsters, maybe anyone who has read the book might be able to help us out! :pac:

This is true!

LZ5by5 wrote: »

I dunno. I mean in the Mist remember when they are in the Pharmacy and a load of little parasites just burst out of the black guy when he falls to the ground?

Hmmm...can't remember exactly what happens. Did they burst out of him or did they eat their way in and out again? :eek:

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Also in Cloverfield, I believe the reason they rushed that girl into the tent was not because the bite made the blood haywire but because something was about to burst out of her and they wanted to contain it before it happened.

Word of God (Abrams I think) said the parasites feed on Cloverfield, and the anti coagulation stuff in their saliva when they bite humans causes their blood to thin...and explode for some reason. I think.

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Perhaps, but for me personally I feel that I've seen the outlines of both monsters well enough in order to find a correlation.

I suppose, but it'd have to be from the book, and I'm not sure exactly how the monster is described in the book.

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Yeah but The Mist is a novel from years ago.

Aaah right of course. Sorry - I just sort of assumed the comparison was strictly between the two films, I haven't read the novel(la) so I'm not sure how the monsters are described in it.

Galvasean

As far as I can tell the Cloverfield monster doesn't really look like any of the Mist monsters.

ITC (impossibly tall creature):


Lobster type thing (apparently it's name is Chuul):


Cloverfield monster (granted its a toy, but body shots are hard to come by):

ScumLord

I guess there are similarities if you go looking for them but really they're two very different films.

Mist being the superior film.

Fysh

I like how the OP ignores that cloverfield's action was centred on the big monster (even if it does spawn little yokes along the way) while the mist shows an apocalyptic "hordes of monsters have appeared from out of nowhere" scenario.

The similarities they share are present in many creature/horror flicks and are more to do with genre tropes than the two films having a secret bond, IMO

Handsome Bob

Galvasean wrote: »

Lobster type thing (apparently it's name is Chuul):


Cloverfield monster (granted its a toy, but body shots are hard to come by):

Ah right, the lobster monster is the one that made me confused. I've never gotten a clear look at the Cloverfield monster before, but from what I could remember the whole way it held itself reminded me of this Chuul creature.

MikeC101

I think maybe there's a Lovecraftian influence to some extent on both, more so with the Mist, that makes them seem similar too

Galvasean

Id say the apparent similarity between Clovey and Chuul is their bird style 'knees' (which are actually ankles), which give the legs a 'backwards' appearance. It is unusual for us to see large creatures in suvh a stance.

faceman

Interesting analogy OP but I wouldnt necessarily agree. I think the monsters in the Mist are for the most part irrlevent. The Mist itself is moreso the monster character than the monsters. Whereas in Cloverfield the monster is the character. I dont think they look alike either.

[QUOTE=Galvasean;62572158

ITC (impossibly tall creature):


[/QUOTE]

This monster is only in the film for a few seconds but its appearance, IMO, is a very important plot point. Its vital at that stage that the audience realise the utter hopelessness of the situation and that humans really are low than the pecking order on the food chain.

Thus paving the way for the decision that is made.

Handsome Bob

Galvasean wrote: »

Id say the apparent similarity between Clovey and Chuul is their bird style 'knees' (which are actually ankles), which give the legs a 'backwards' appearance. It is unusual for us to see large creatures in suvh a stance.

I think another one thing that threw me off was that the skin colour of all the creatures seems to be similar, you know that kind of fleshy colour.

faceman wrote: »

Interesting analogy OP but I wouldnt necessarily agree. I think the monsters in the Mist are for the most part irrlevent. The Mist itself is moreso the monster character than the monsters. Whereas in Cloverfield the monster is the character. I dont think they look alike either.

Another (:D) thing that had me thinking about it was how both stories used something to hide the monsters from full view. The mist allowed the monsters to wreak havoc without warning in The Mist whereas the New York City skyscrapers were used to hide the monster in Cloverfield.

But having said all this I accept that my analogy is ultimately a fail.

Galvasean

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Another (:D) thing that had me thinking about it was how both stories used something to hide the monsters from full view. The mist allowed the monsters to wreak havoc without warning in The Mist whereas the New York City skyscrapers were used to hide the monster in Cloverfield.

Well do remember that both films also both had (by Hollywood blockbuster standards) fairly low budgets, so the CGI wasn't the best. The mist/skyscrapers were also used to hide at times suspect CGI. Although to be fair on the Mist, even with top class CGI a similar approach would have been taken. Something similar could be said of Cloverfield, in that the film's style/gimmick relied on obscuring the creature.

actuallylike

How do, didn't have time to read all the previous posts so sorry if I'm been repetitive but just in response to the original post, you're been way to generous while looking for coincidence. By your logic, Pretty Woman is the same as Copycat cause they both have a woman in it!
I response to your list:

LZ5by5 wrote: »

[*]You have the mysterious main monster (s) that you rarely get a clear view of.

Used in countless movies throughout the course of movie history (Jaws, Godzilla, you don't even see Marlon Brando till the end in Apocalypse Now!)

LZ5by5 wrote: »

[*]Both monsters seem to have little monsters accompany them.

In the Mist, it's just a huge 'colony' of monsters, big and small. No indication to say that there's one big one controlling them.

LZ5by5 wrote: »

[*]These creatures both have ways of infecting humans with their own spawn.

Again, used in countless films over the years. Nothing to indicate a link between the two films

LZ5by5 wrote: »

[*]Both main monsters seem to have a certain resemblance (I'm not saying that they are exactly the same).

Once again, it's a monster film! Even though, if it's the huge monster at the end of the Mist you're talking about, that monster has nothing to do with the plot of the film apart from an image the special effect guys wanted to show.

LZ5by5 wrote: »

[*]That both films have

awfully depressing

endings.

Hate to repeat myself but here goes...it's a monster film and how can anyone link two films because they have sad endings?!?
"You know what films are really alike?"
"Bambi and Final Destination!"

LZ5by5 wrote: »

[*]The main characters in both films have a preoccupied determination to get across town and save their loved ones.
[/LIST]

Final chance to repeat myself so here goes...STORY LINE USED IN NEARLY EVERY DISASTER FILM EVER MADE! HOW CAN ANYONE LINK TWO FILMS BECAUSE OF IT!!! Day After Tomorrow, Volcano, Dantes Peak, Earthquake, all involve people searching for their loved ones, otherwise where's the story?

Handsome Bob

In case I didn't make it clear before, what my over-riding influence was in creating this thread is that J.J. Abram's most successful show, Lost, has been heavily influenced by Stephen King's work. That's not my own musings, the Lost creators have mentioned it on various occasions. Indeed, Stephen King was even a consultant on Lost S3. So it's much more than just about comparisons to monster films, it's about an already established relationship between Abrams and King, and in turn about the logical feasibility that Abrams could have borrowed from King (and not for the first time) in making Cloverfield.

actuallylike

You're first post asks did Cloverfield borrow anything from the Mist (I haven't read the short story, only seen the film) and I have to answer apart from the obvious stuff (monster's, etc.), nothing at all. The stories are completely different. Mist deals with the whole 'we're the monsters, not what's outside' thingy, and Cloverfield, in my opinion is just another monster movie but shot differently and had a really good marketing strategy, that's it!
The comparisons, as I've mentioned above are only skin deep, comparisons that can be made to any movie but as a whole, they are completely different films.