第52屆超級碗激動人心的結(jié)局并非周日晚上唯一的驚喜，因為Netflix在中場休息時間發(fā)布了一部新電影的預告片，引起了數(shù)百萬球迷的興趣。在費城老鷹隊戰(zhàn)勝新英格蘭愛國者隊之后，這部影片立刻在該流媒體網(wǎng)站上線。

昨天晚上的比賽在NBC進行了直播。在超級碗的天價中場廣告時間，Netflix首次發(fā)布了影片《科洛弗悖論》（The Cloverfield Paradox）的預告片。這部影片是制片人J.J.艾布拉姆斯的科幻三部曲當中的第三部，但三部影片在劇情上的聯(lián)系并不緊密。當然，Netflix并不是唯一一家在超級碗上宣傳新影視節(jié)目的電影公司或流媒體服務(wù)公司。

但令人驚喜的是，Netflix的《科洛弗悖論》將在比賽結(jié)束之后立刻上線。這是該流媒體行業(yè)巨頭首次采取這樣的做法，或許是受到了傳統(tǒng)電視臺的啟發(fā)。一直以來，傳統(tǒng)電視臺都會利用超級碗結(jié)束后的時段來宣傳新劇或劇集的特別篇（例如，NBC在昨天晚上播出了一集備受期待的《我們的一天》（This Is Us））。

而更令人意外的是，Netflix之前并沒有確認從影片制作方維亞康姆（Viacom）旗下的派拉蒙影業(yè)（Paramount Pictures）購買《科洛弗悖論》的消息。此前一直有傳聞稱該流媒體網(wǎng)站有意購買該部影片。《科洛弗悖論》最初名為《上帝粒子》，另有報道稱，該影片的發(fā)布時間曾被多次延期。（這對于一部電影而言絕不是好消息。）

那么，這到底是不是一部好電影呢？到目前為止，評論界并不這樣認為。

《科洛弗悖論》上線的時間不到24小時，就已經(jīng)遭到了影評家們的無情抨擊。其在評論聚合平臺爛番茄（Rotten Tomatoes）的好評率只有可憐的12%（截至周一下午，只有25個評價）。在另外一個平臺Metacritic上，這部電影得到的評分略高，但也只有40分（共計100個評價）。

這部影片確實收到了一些尖刻的評價，例如有影評家稱它是“車禍現(xiàn)場”，是“一部垮掉的電影”?！睹麍觥冯s志的喬安娜·羅賓遜這樣總結(jié)這部電影：“《科洛弗悖論》中有太多稀奇古怪的轉(zhuǎn)折和科幻概念，卻忘記了這類電影必不可少的一件事情：可信的、能夠引起共鳴的人類角色。”

有大事發(fā)生。比賽結(jié)束后見分曉。

— 《科洛弗悖論》 (@CloverfieldPRDX) 2018年2月5日

但Netflix在決定原創(chuàng)內(nèi)容時，并不總是關(guān)心專業(yè)影評人的意見。該公司最近決定拍攝奇幻驚悚片《光靈》（Bright）的續(xù)集，盡管第一部電影（有報道稱Netflix斥資9,000萬美元買下了這部電影的版權(quán)）同樣收到了評論界的差評。而根據(jù)尼爾森（Nielsen）的統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)（Netflix否認了這些數(shù)據(jù)），觀看《光靈》的Netflix用戶數(shù)量，使其有足夠的理由投資續(xù)集。

《科洛弗悖論》是否也是同樣的情況？目前預測結(jié)果仍為時尚早（Netflix沒有公布收視率），但在爛番茄上，有62%的觀眾給出了正面評價，Metacritic上目前的用戶評分也達到了7.0分（總分10分）。

這部影片和2008年的《科洛弗檔案》（Cloverfield）以及2016年的《科洛弗道10號》（10 Cloverfield Lane）出自同一名制片人（艾布拉姆斯），并且都有神秘怪獸類電影常見的敘事關(guān)聯(lián)。前兩部小成本電影在爛番茄上都得到了普遍好評，也都取得了不錯的票房成績（《科洛弗檔案》的全球總票房為1.7億美元，《科洛弗道10號》為1.1億美元）。

Netflix并未透露購買《科洛弗悖論》流媒體播放權(quán)的價格，所以與往常一樣，我們很難判斷該流媒體巨頭購買這部電影是否明智。但它確實在超級碗比賽期間成功吸引了人氣。（財富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：劉進龍/汪皓

Super Bowl LII’s thrilling finish wasn’t the only surprise of Sunday night, as Netflixenticed millions of football fans by dropping a preview for a new movie that debuted on the streaming site immediately after the Philadelphia Eagles finished off their win over the New England Patriots.

Netflix premiered a movie trailer for The Cloverfield Paradox, the third film in a loosely-connected sci-fi trilogy from producer J.J. Abrams, during one of the very expensive commercial breaks between the action of last night’s game on NBC. Of course, Netflix was far from the only movie studio or streaming service to promote new programming during the Super Bowl.

But the surprising twist from Netflix was the fact The Cloverfield Paradox would actually be available to stream as soon as the game ended. It was a first-of-its-kind move from the streaming giant, which may have taken its inspiration from the traditional TV networks that have used the post-Super Bowl time slot to promote new TV series or special episodes (such as last night’s long-awaited This Is Us installment on NBC) for years.

The move was made that much more surprising by the fact that Netflix had not previously confirmed its acquisition of The Cloverfield Paradox from Viacom’s Paramount Pictures, which produced the movie. The streaming site had been rumoredto be interested in purchasing the film, which was previously called God’s Particle and reportedly saw its release delayed multiple times. (Never a good sign for a movie.)

So after all of that, is the movie even any good? Well, so far, critics don’t think so.

Though The Cloverfield Paradox has only been available online for less than 24 hours, the movie is already being panned by movie critics, receiving a paltry 12% score on the reviews aggregator Rotten Tomatoes (out of a total of just 25 reviews, as of Monday afternoon). The movie’s score on Metacritic, another online review aggregator, is a slightly more healthy 40 (out of 100).

But the film is undoubtedly receiving its share of scathing reviews, with critics calling it a “trainwreck” and “a bust of a movie.” Vanity Fair‘s Joanna Robinson sums it up: “The Cloverfield Paradox reaches for so many outlandish twists, turns, and sci-fi tropes that it forgets to build the one thing that genre stories of its kind need: believable and sympathetic human characters.”

Some thing happened. You'll know why after the game.

— The Cloverfield Paradox (@CloverfieldPRDX) February 5, 2018

Yet Netflix doesn’t always care about the opinions of professional movie reviewers when making decisions on original programming. The company recently forged ahead with a sequel for the fantasy thriller Bright despite the fact that the first movie (which Netflix paid a reported $90 million to acquire) similarly bombed with critics. However, by Nielsen’s measurements (which Netflix disavows), enough Netflix users seem to have watched Bright to justify further investment.

Will that be the case for The Cloverfield Paradox? It’s too soon to tell (and Netflix never releases viewership statistics), but the 62% of the movie’s audience reviews on Rotten Tomatoes are positive, while the film currently has a rating of 7.0 (out of 10) from users on Metacritic.

The film and its two predecessors, 2008’s Cloverfield and 2016’s 10 Cloverfield Lane, are share the same producer (Abrams) as well as a somewhat mysterious monster-movie narrative connection. Each of the two previous films have generally positive Rotten Tomatoes ratings, and they fared reasonably well at the box office ($170 million in global gross for Cloverfield and $110 million for 10 Cloverfield Lane) for lower-budget movies.

Netflix has not said how much it paid to acquire streaming rights for The Cloverfield Paradox, so as always, it will be difficult to judge whether or not the streaming giant’s purchase was a prudent one. But it definitely succeeded in generating in-game Super Bowl buzz.