Indy.com
Today:
Cloverfield
Posted: Jan 18, 2008 in Movies
Tags:
RELATED POSTS
If you've read any reviews of "Cloverfield," (including the AP review found on this site), you have heard that description of "Cloverfield" as equal parts "Blair Witch Project" and "Godzilla." If you toss in just a touch of "Aliens," I'll say that comparison is totally spot on in the best of ways.
"Cloverfield" is the best monster movie I've seen in years, and might reinvigorate what was a more or less dead genre.
The picture starts by letting us know that the footage we're about to see was found in a camera in at "the site formerly known as Central Park." The rest of the film is shot as home-video footage.
After a brief shot of two lovers cavorting around an apartment, we learn that one of those people is a guy named Rob (Michael Stahl-David), whose friends are throwing him a party celebrating his last night in America before he moves to Japan. The other was Beth (Odette Youstman), a friend of our characters who apparently became a bit more to Rob.
After Beth and Rob quarrel, she leaves the party with another guy. Moments later the apartment is rocked, and speculation is rampant. Was it an earthquake? Was it a terrorist attack?
Most of the remainder of the film follows Rob and a small group of his friends as they try to find Beth among the chaos.
And chaotic it is, with a giant monster rampaging the city, killing people in scores and shedding smaller, spider-like creatures who start attacking people as well.
Then the military shows up and starts blasting away at the creature.
Don't go into those film expecting a campy man-in-suit ala "Godzilla." The film is played arrow-straight and just as serious. It's scary and intense the whole way through.
And while there is a bit of shaky camera work, it's not as pronounced (or motion-sickness-inducing) as "Blair Witch."
The monster itself is almost indescribable, and an attempt to do so would be fruitless. It's seen largely in quick glances and shaky camera shots, and almost always from a distance.
The video gimmick feels real as well, from the amateurish feel of the film to the occasional lapses into "recorded over" material of Rob's and Beth's day (the one before the monster attacked). It's a great touch that lends realism.
The film instead focuses on the characters rather than the beast. We care about them and want them to find their friend.
Also to the film's credit is that we get little explanation as to where the monster came from (An early report suggests it came from the ocean, but it is never expanded upon), or what those things falling off of it are.
The film is a sort of commentary on post-9/11 America and the fear of an unknown monster coming to get us. The subtext isn't hard to see, but it's skillfully kept in the background.
"Cloverfield" is the first must-see film of 2008, and producer JJ Abrams and freshman director Matt Reeves live up to the hype that their innovative marketing campaign built for the film.
nice review, Joe! Though I'm still on the fence when it comes to this one... is it true that the running time is approx 70min (20 min of which is the scene from the party that was so featured in the preview)? that's such a ridiculous # that it is hard for me to believe the report had any credence.
It was only about 70 minutes long, but I don't know that the party scene was 20 minutes of the running time. It felt like a full-length movie for me, though. It is VERY intense.
I just watched it and I'm 50/50 on it. Everyone kept saying Godzilla and it wasn't, so I'm glad that it was something else. I couldn't even describe what that something else was to be honest. You just have to see it for yourself. I think I would've enjoyed it more without the annoying guy behind the camera. Everyone else seemed likable, why did we have to have an annoying guy? If he hadn't been there I probably would've given the movie an A- or B+, but because of him it brought it down to about a C+.
Ehhhhh I was not super impressed with the film. From any standpoint. It was different and I enjoyed that.
I liked Cloverfield. I hated the love story slant, but the creature was awesome! I will never live in New York. Too many monsters and terrorists.
a solidly entertaining flick, Cloverfield is - however, scary and nervewracking it was not. i've seen it twice now - liking it better after the 2nd time around. my favorite character was actually marlena - strong, sarcastic and witty. my favorite aspects of it was the way it was shot ... the acting was decent, although, the characters didn't seemed quite terrified enough - almost bored at times (guess you have to suspend your disbelief a tad ;)). anyway, glad i saw it, but it didn't floor me like i had hoped (considering my love for Bad Robot features).
Awesome, awesome, awesome. Did anyone else catch the thing falling from the sky into the ocean?
I missed that myself, but I had the feeling that the "coming from the ocean" thing was a bit of a smokescreen. My cousin and I were talking about the smaller creatures and how they seemed kind of like lice (as opposed to the creature reproducing smaller creatures ala Godzilla). It wouldn't make sense for the monster to have lice if it were an ocean creature.
The thing I liked most about the movie wasn't just the scariness or the unique way it presented the material (not totally original with movies like "Blair Witch" et. al, but still relatively unusual), but that so little was actually divulged about the monster or the ultimate ending to the monster story. There are hints that the monster did more damage (or perhaps this monster is just one of many attacks by a series of monsters).
There's just so much left to the imagination, and so much room for expanding the story and the potential of going in a series of different directions. It could be a franchise with totally interchangable main characters that we can still in some way care about.
The movie needed zombies.
Awesome, awesome, awesome. Did anyone else catch the thing falling from the sky into the ...
I didn't catch that at all and I never looked away once. That's not to suggest it didn't happen. I'm sure this is one of those movies that reveals something new every time you (re)watch it. I'm also certain that they'll be at least one sequel. And I'm good with that. It was a very entertaining movie. Joe nails when he suggests there's so much left to the imagination. Really, your imagination is all you're working with because you given so little.
Image of something splashing in the ocean in the final scene can be found here: http://cache.io9.com/assets/resources/2008/01/Cloversplash.jpg
Adding even more to the mystery, it turns out that Cloverfield had a press secretary named Godzilla, while Godzilla had a secretary named Cloverfield.
It's amazing how much this movie did right, compared to Godzilla 98, which was very similar on the surface. By that I mean that each featured a love story while a giant monster arrives in Manhattan.
I'm definitely going to see it again.
On a side note, I don't think this movie would make for a good rental, because you need the big screen to appreciate the scope of the monster.
Okay... I went and watched this movie with my boyfriend and I was super excited to watch this movie because some people said it was good and the commercial made it seem really interesting. That movie sucked ass... it was boring and I hate the way they recorded through the video camera and it was shaky. That and the guy who had the camera most of the movie was so calm about there being a monster attacking his city. My boyfriend and me were getting motion sickness and it was just really bad. I had the worst headachee after the movie was over, too! People were walking out of the movie theater. I regret paying the money I did for that movie... it was a waste of time and money.
Look at that. "Sucked ass" doesn't get picked up by the cussword filter, but "d--------" (D-O-U-C-H-E-B-A-G) does. That messed up my "Top Ten" post a little the other day. Funny.
I caught the splash at the end. On a side note, for those brave enough to go back again, watch the DoD test pattern screen. It is rittled with J.J. Abrams inspired "easter eggs." After reading a lot of fan reviews good and bad one thing is clear. If you hate The Blair Witch Project and roller coasters you're not apt to give this movie a chance. All in all I would say this the first movie in two years I've seen in a theater that I didn't mind paying to see and will see again. Good review, Joe.
Yah, it was similar to the Blair Witch, which I saw 3 or 4 times when it came out. Of course, I didn't go that many times because it was the best movie ever...I just happened to be in college and dating a lot at the time. Blair Witch was a great date movie. I followed up each date with a "romantic" walk in the woods. Ah, memories.
Anyway, if you hate Blair Witch, you'll probably hate this movie as well. I didn't notice the motion sickness thing from the camera, but I went to a theater with insanely large screen and sat in the very back row of their stadium-style seating.
The scam to see this movie was pulled off just like Blair Witch. Trailers had nothing and the movie had little.
I would not go as far to say it sucked ass... but not worth my time.
My only complaint, is that I would have preferred ore screentime for the monster itself.
That being said, I enjoyed the movie quite a bit.
I have to confess that my main reason for going to see this movie was to see the new Star Trek trailer. I ended up sticking around. I thought the party scene was overly long BUT still needed to be there just to set the characters up. I was glad that there was minimal time for the creature as far as telling it's origins and such. Probably the only thing that bothered me was the way that the army behaved while the characters were at that makeshift hospital. They would've VERY easily taken that camera under a real situaion. No way in hell they would've let them go back out on to the streets while all that stuff was going on either. It was MUCH better than 'Blair Witch' which I thought was WAY over-rated anyway. Not something that I would sit through again though.
Cloverfield was an intresting film not real impressive I must say..The monster was great and creative as hell.The monster should have gotten more screentime personally!