Cloverfield (2008)

Tony, 20. January 2008, 19:56

Cloverfield: everything that you expect only less. Or something like that.

Caught the new “JJ Abrams” movie this afternoon. My initial thought was something like: Lost better have a better ending than this. It’s the kind of movie that ends in a way that fits but that you won’t necessarily like.

Don’t want to give too much away. I will say that I thought the acting was spot-on, especially for a cast of new-comers. The shaky camerawork was frustrating, but there were enough moments of solid shooting that it evened itself out. The “monster” works well.

I guess the thing is that, like another movie that I vaguely remember (I think it was a war movie), the fact that you see things from one perspective is frustrating because you don’t get all of the information that you want.

The movie is short, and it certainly feels like it in the end. The credits don’t add anything except some actual monster-movie soundtrack music.

There’s one genius touch that the movie has, and that has to do with the videotape/disc used in the camera in the first place. It adds some nice context to things.

How far will you go to tell the one you love how you feel?


84 minutes

The film kept my attention although at almost no time did it elicit the type of emotions that it probably wanted to. It’s not that great of a film, and I’ll go into more of that later. I think other idiots will think it’s OK, but not something that I would rush out to see.

I liked the idea of shooting the movie through the perspective of a hand-held camera. Yes, Blair Witch Project already did that, but I thought it was a nice touch in more “standard” feature film. I could see the jerkiness causing some to have problems, but it was not as bad as Blair Witch imo.

The beginning of the film is pretty cool if you didn’t know it was a monster film. The filmmakers do a decent job of building up the characters and story of what looks to be a drama/romance about 20-somethings.

Here’s what ruined the film for me:

1. The monster looked stupid. You can make a good monster film if you can’t take the monster seriously. The tentacles are the first thing you see and they didn’t look right. The spindly legs and beady eyes didn’t help either. Also, the monster’s roar sounded too much like Godzilla, which doesn’t have a strong association with terror for me;

2. Hud’s “comedy”, really stupid (almost along the lines of an idiot in the sit-coms) weakened the scarier factor. His comments are dumb, and he’s totally unconvincing as someone who is afraid. I also didn’t buy the fact that the other characters would follow the main character to find his girlfriend, but I could lived with that;

3. The situations the characters faced weren’t that interesting or thrilling. The subway scene and rescuing the girlfriend from the building were all not very exciting, imo.

  1. No Comments

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.