My Review of Cloverfield - by spacey


I thought I would do a review of a movie that I was long anticipating and finally got to see: Cloverfield - you know the monster movie that had no title just a release date and was produced by JJ Abrahms? Prior to this movie coming out, there was a lot of speculation regarding the details of this movie. Fanboys picked apart the commercials and Things like "The Exploding Woman" theories and what was really going on behind the viral marketing. People who heard and paid attention to the "hype" were in two camps: The "I really want to see this" camp and the "It’s going to be worse than Snakes on a Plane" camp. And while there seemed to be more to Cloverfield than it’s name and premise, people were just waiting to see how bad it was going to be and could not be convinced that this would be nothing more than a retelling of Godzilla or a Live version of the Video game Rampage. The fact that it was shrouded in secrecy only lent itself to these rumors.

But the fact was if they told you what it was really about all of the surprises and mystery would be gone. Going into this movie with as little of info as possible is definitely the way to go. Even though I tried not to look at reviews, I really wanted to know what the gen consensus was: Is the movie good or bad. That’s all I wanted to know. Unfortunately, reviewers simply cannot write a review without giving away important details and I would occasionally come across a tidbit and immediately close the browser. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Roger Ebert for ruining the last few moments of the movie in his first two sentences of his review. I still went into the movie with an open mind knowing a few of the details and knowing that most considered it a good movie.

DONT CONTINE UNLESS YOU WANT TO BE SLIGHTLY SPOILED

It was a good movie. And a good movie as in theatre experience. Once the monster stuff happens, the movie eats you up chews you up and spits you out after it’s hour of carnage. I really appreciated the beginning (though my friend was sighing waiting for the movie to pick up) because if we didn’t care about who these folks were, it wouldn’t have worked. And even though I would NOT have made any of the decisions they made, esp Rob, I could still see some people doing something like that. If it were my partner/husband I would consider at least making an attempt to save him. For the most part, the movie was very visceral with great sound efx and kept you on the edge of your seat. There were some very terrifying moments too not to mention some surprises and twists - the audience gasped collectively during the news footage of the monster rubbing itself on a building and those things start falling off and creating mayhem.

No there was no answer to why or how to a myriad of things. I think this helped the movie a lot. T I went in knowing there would be no explanation regarding the monster, which I know peeved many. I also knew it would be total handi-cam, which is probably the number one complaint from those who didn’t like it. While I agree that it was a device that put the viewer into horror the situation, after much thought, I think it was almost a mistake to do the movie like this. I’ll explain in just a bit. I think the use of no-name actors lent to a more believability to the movie and helped us forget it WAS a movie. Not to mention you have JJ producing (Not sure the amount of involvement) as well as Bryan Burk (EVP of Bad Robot – JJ’s Company and also produces LOST), Drew Goddard wrote it (also writes, produces and directs for LOST as well). These folks are well seasoned at what they do, so I knew going in who was behind the wheel and knew the movie was in good hands.

OK, so I liked it a lot. I also have some nitpicks too. First -length of movie vs the beginning. If you are going to take 20 min from an 80 min movie for introduction, you really should add that back into the story. I felt that 60 min was not long enough for the action/monster portion of the movie. It could have been better with 30 min added. There were not as many situations or monster moments, I felt. There should have been more. Second - The Camera as a device for filming the movie. For the beginning it’s a neat device and does a great job at setting up the characters (Hud looking at breasts instead of faces was funny). You feel like you are part of the party and know these folks. Once the destruction starts the camera is no longer believable. THE LAST thing I would be doing is running around trying to film stuff and messing my own POV (point of view) with a big ole camera in the way. There is no way to concentrate on surviving and filming. They should have either swapped to another POV or included a regular movie POV at the same time. Also the camera would have broken or the battery would have given up. When was the last time you saw night vision on a video camera (that appeared to be a non-digital kind) though I just may not be astute to all functions on a camcorder. Also where did they get a camera that was virtually indestructible? Third - The rescue of Beth. I don’t care if I had followed and gotten as far as they did, once I saw the building I would have turned back. That would have been the final sign of a really bad idea. Last nitpick would be when the monster is seen from the helicopter from above it’s like way down there and somehow it jumps up to reach the one they are in.

The rumors of a sequel. I am not totally sure about this as I really oppose sequels. But one way they can do it would be to retell the same story without the handi-cam and thus make the first movie a taste of what’s to come. Or take the back story from the viral marketing and expand on it. There is a back story that foreshadows things to come and infers reasons behind the monsters existence and why perhaps it’s in NYC (apparently the monster is mentally linked to some guy who worked for Taraguano Oil or something like that). I can even see it being about him and his history. I think it would be funny if in the sequel we see Rob et al go past and someone makes the remark along the lines of "what the hell is he doing with a camera in a crisis like this?" Apparently there was another guy that came across HUD’s vision who was also taping (the bridge scene) thus getting into what has been originally said of a sequel - that other people are documenting the event too. I really hope that if there is a sequel, they drop the handi-cam POV.

I know this is long and congrats if you made it to this point. Great Movie that could have been better. Grade - B
[Edited 1/23/08 19:14pm]

superspaceboy said:

I'm not gonna go see it Bob so tell me does everybody die? How does ti end?

Stymie said:

go see it! it's fun!

Anxiety said:

Uh uh. I can't do the shaky camera thing. Too much of that in Blair witch and in Irreversible.

Stymie said:

ok, you got me there. i had a friend throw up when i took her to see "dancer in the dark". i wouldn't force cinema nausea on you.

Anxiety said:

unless it's Upchuck 9 or whatever the fuck that Bjork movie was you took me to.

Stymie said:

that movie had the opposite problem - the camera would be still for ten minutes at a time.

"it's a ship....ok, it's still a ship...hey look, birds....still a ship...ship....shhhiiiippp...hmmm..."

Anxiety said:

I swear that felt like the longest hour and a half of my life.

Stymie said:

D to tha I to tha T to tha T to tha O. Dayum.

eleven said:

I can remember the look on your face.

Stymie said:

Not sure if everyone does the camera gets covered by rubble. It ends with a voice transmission at the end of the credits "It's still ali..."

superspaceboy said:

I'm glad I'm not seeing it now. That would have pissed me off. Leaves the door open for a sequel.

Stymie said:

I have no interest in seeing that movie. Certainly if eleven doesn't like it, I most certianly won't.

superspaceboy said:

This is about the only thing I believe I ever heard him say he didn't like.

Stymie said:

i was less angry when that movie ended than i was at the end of 'codename: the cleaner'

and i believe going to see both of those movies was my fault

Stymie said:

Some lady hurled in the lobby after watching it.

The beginning is really shaky, but as soon as the action starts it gets a bit better.

Anxiety said:

yeah but it was also your idea to see Capote, Brokeback, a Dirty Shame, Bubba-Hotep, The Ten and a bunch of other movies I would not have seen and loved if it weren't for you so I forgive you.

JustErin said:

When we went to see it a theatre employee addressed the crowd before it began to say some people found the camera movement nauseating and he pointed out how to find the nearest restroom should it be needed.

CarrieMpls said:

Actually, I'd say about 8-10 people left within the first 15 minutes.

JustErin said:

We sat in the back row off to the side. It was perfect.

i wish I could get motion sickness from a movie!

ufoclub said:

life through my eyes looks all shaky like that, so when i see it in a movie i guess it doesn't bother me.