Cloverfield review

posted at 11:25 am on January 27, 2008 by Bryan

I saw it Saturday, and pretty much agree with Ace’s take on it. I probably liked the monster design a little more than he did though. It’s an ugly beast but seems naturalistic. And I agree that the camera motion is a bit too much. A steadier camera once the idea is established would have helped make Cloverfield more enjoyable. If you’re susceptible to motion sickness, do not see Cloverfield. Ever. That said, I had a great time with this one. You shouldn’t expect profound works of theatrical brilliance in a monster film, and Cloverfield doesn’t deliver any. But it’s fun and it works.

*Spoilers follow.*

The one thing I would add to Ace’s take is that Cloverfield pretty much demolishes the rules and cliches of monster films, and that’s why it worked so well for me. Ever since the 1954 Godzilla, the rules of big monster films have been set: You have a monster. You have scientists explaining the monster’s origins and maybe its intentions in some briefing, the proximate cause of the attack is usually something mankind did (though it can be an alien or whatever, but you’re always given that bit of information and it’s usually that we had it coming), you have some intrepid reporter chasing the story, you have arguments between officials over what to do about it, and you nearly always get some super weapon or aircraft deployed to stop it after it has crushed several army battalions and swatted our best fighters out of the sky. Or you get a second, third or fourth monster to fight it, such as in some of the more recent Japanese kaiju films. And you nearly always have some helpless kid caught up in the chaos. I always hate that kid. His presence in the film is always contrived and he’s given screen time that would better spent serving up more monster mayhem.

Cloverfield gives you some of the usual stuff, but never in the way previous monster films have. The monster’s origins and intentions are never explained. It just shows up and commences wrecking the town. The intrepid reporter becomes fleeting glances at flat screens in an electronics store, and you get plot surprises even in those few seconds. The kid in jeopardy becomes you as you tag along with the main characters. The opening of the film gives away what’s going to happen to most of those characters, so you’re removed from having to pretend to care about that and thus are left to take in the scenes with less certainty of who is going to survive what. That plus the camera work makes the whole film more visceral than any previous monster film. The wait before the attack begins has the same effect — you know it’s coming, but not exactly when, and by the time you get used to the lives of the somewhat vacuous characters, you get thrown with them into the insanity. Unlike previous monster films, you never get the distant shot of the creature as it marches inevitably up the harbor — when you do get a wide shot of the creature, well, even that ends with a bang. You never get the ground-level shots of the monster stomping on trains or neighborhoods. You do get one low shot looking up at it, and it’s memorable. Cloverfield takes out all of the usual kaiju kabuki, making it the most original monster film made in decades and maybe ever, even though it follows the same basic plot trajectory that all monster films follow: Monster arrives, monster attacks, stuff falls apart and people die.

There is heroism and cool competence as in previous monster films, particularly in the way the military is portrayed, but the film doesn’t give you the grand arrival of the army the way previous monster films usually do. The military just appears amid the chaos and nearly kills the main characters since they’re between the army and the monster. That struck me as playing out much like it probably would should an actual gigantic space or whatever monster ever wreak havoc in a major city (though the military would probably take a little longer to get the tanks on the scene). What little plot there is gets exposed in quick conversations between a military officer and the lead character, but even that isn’t handled in the same way monster films usually do it. They make the main character a key to the monster’s destruction somehow, so the military is either resisting him or deferring to him. In Cloverfield, the main character is just another guy trying to survive, and the military officer spends all of maybe 10 seconds explaining the situation to him. It works. Every time Cloverfield jumps past a monster movie cliche, it works.

So though I half expected to get mad at Cloverfield, I liked it. It left me with a bit of a headache, but I liked it.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Does the black guy die at the end? The black guy always dies at the end of sci-fi monster horror films.

Apeking on January 27, 2008 at 11:30 AM

i would suggest, if you are prone to motion sickness, sseeing it AT HOME.

for me, i had a hard time handling it on that massive 40 foot screen, but i have an easier time at home dealing with those types of movies.

the CGI was some of the best ive seen.

i enjoyed the subtlety of the movie as well. it just wasnt shot after shot of a clear monster rampaging around. most of the movie it was hard to see clearly.

im also glad it was an hour, because i was about to puke because of the motion.

blatantblue on January 27, 2008 at 11:30 AM

I set the bar for this movie really low. I was expecting to see very little, or no good shots of the monster and was prepared for a giant question mark at the end.

I was pretty glad I went to go see it, though. The monster is freakin awesome, and I liked the crazyness of the camera footage. It might be the best big monster movie I’ve ever seen.

BadgerHawk on January 27, 2008 at 11:40 AM

They make the main character a key to the monster’s destruction somehow, so the military is either resisting him or deferring to him.

Yeah…that’s one thing I didn’t quite understand. Without putting a spoiler here, after the chopper crashes towards the end, Hud seems to be specifically “targeted” by the monster.

There’s actually a few spots out on the internets that try to tie into the monster’s origins too.

Agreed tho…Cloverfield is well worth the time and $$$ to see. And that “motion sickness” thing is definetly a valid warning. A few people left the theater after a while.

JetBoy on January 27, 2008 at 11:42 AM

Too much of something ain’t good. Saving Private Ryan had the right idea…this was just overkill.

tomas on January 27, 2008 at 11:45 AM

My only complaint of the movie (the over shakiness of the camera is a given) was the actors who acted like what Hollywood’s version of “real” people would react in such a situation.

Case in point, towards the end, after the group had been attacked by (giving my best Dr Evil impression) mini monsters in the subway, they meet up with a group the Army. The FIRST thing any one of them mentions after meeting up with some soldiers was the main guy asking for help to get to his girlfriend, neglecting the fact that their friend there was bleeding profusely from gaping wounds and was getting woozy from the loss of blood, but no girlfriend comes first! I didn’t buy that.

I also did not get the argument from critics that this movie retracts from 9-11. The only thing I saw was the writers and director reviewed material of how people reacted in 9-11 and tried to duplicate that (in Hollywood’s own weird way). I also think they got the blast scene, as the Empire State Building collapses and the debris cloud flows along the ground towards the main characters and camera, from 9-11 footage. Effective. As to any similarities this movie had to the events of 9-11, I understand, but people need to get over it. 9-11 was an attack on not just NYC, but the whole country. For all due respect New Yorkers, 9-11 was not about you.

If you want to see the movie, go to it! If not so much, then either rent it or just forget about it.

I’m waiting for a spoof of this movie.

Weebork on January 27, 2008 at 11:53 AM

I saw it last night. You’re right about the motion sickness aspect. I’m a roller coaster junkie, yet that flick came seriously closer to making me want to hurl than anything Six Flags has ever built.

TC@LeatherPenguin on January 27, 2008 at 11:59 AM

Also, at the very end, when the couple were in Central Park and get bombed to death, was that supposed to be a nuke going off or just a bunch of more bombs? I was expecting the “grand finale” that the one Army Sgt told the group that they’d better get to the choppers by 6AM. I assumed they meant if regular ordinance was ineffective, they would nuke the monster.

I would have dropped a few MOABs just to piss it off some more.

Weebork on January 27, 2008 at 12:01 PM

I didn’t get why the helicopter evacuating them decided to fly directly over ground zero. You usually try to get away by going in the opposite direction.

amkun on January 27, 2008 at 12:05 PM

Everybody, wanna see something cool?:

Go here

BRYAN, Post an update with this link. Everyone who saw the move should click there.

Jimmy the Dhimmi on January 27, 2008 at 12:05 PM

Amkun,

That’s because in real life, the military would have done what you expect them to do, out of sheer common sense. There is absofreakinglutely no way the military would let other aircraft fly in bombing path. The only reason why they did so in the movie was so the monster can scare the audience and make the helicopter crash. I guess the main characters just weren’t allowed to live in this movie. (Well, just one of the main characters made it, the hottie brunette girlfriend of the brother who got smashed on the bridge.)

Weebork on January 27, 2008 at 12:12 PM

Probably the worst movie I have seen in a couple of years. The Blair Witch set the precedent and should have never tried again.

volsense on January 27, 2008 at 12:12 PM

Also, at the very end, when the couple were in Central Park and get bombed to death, was that supposed to be a nuke going off or just a bunch of more bombs?
I would have dropped a few MOABs just to piss it off some more.

Weebork on January 27, 2008 at 12:01 PM

Word on the ‘net is that it was a MOAB of some sort.
Anyone catch the staticky radio transmission at the end of the credits?
Rumour is…
it’s still alive….

Frozen Tex on January 27, 2008 at 12:15 PM

The movie was SPECTACULAR. Best monster movie I have ever seen. If you are prone to motion sickness, sit further back in the theater. No one I went with even mentioned anything about the shaky camera, it wasnt that big of a deal since the directors used a camera with stabilization mechanisms, instead of like blair witch where there was absolutely no stabilization. After seeing the movie, and noticing all of the hidden things in it, you will really get into the story and be very hyped for the next cloverfield that will be coming out.

muyoso on January 27, 2008 at 12:16 PM

volsense on January 27, 2008 at 12:12 PM

I went in to this movie having almost no expectations, so maybe that’s why I enjoyed, but not loved, the movie.

As I said earlier, I’m waiting for some spoof to be made of this movie. The movie has “parody me” written all over it.

Weebork on January 27, 2008 at 12:17 PM

Frozen Tex,

A MOAB, eh? Hmmm. Well, ok.

Nuke! Nuke! Nuke! Nuke!

Thanks.

Weebork on January 27, 2008 at 12:19 PM

Good to know about the motion sickness thing. I won’t be seeing it then. Saving Private Ryan was bad enough for me that this one would just about kill me.

I love me a good, fun monster movie, but all the shaky cam is just annoying and frankly makes me incredibly nauseous.

mjk on January 27, 2008 at 12:19 PM

@ volsense on January 27, 2008 at 12:12 PM

Worst movie you have seen in a couple years??? Really??

muyoso on January 27, 2008 at 12:21 PM

@ mjk on January 27, 2008 at 12:19 PM

It isnt bad at all if you sit towards the back of the theater.

muyoso on January 27, 2008 at 12:21 PM

I’m am totally resistant to motion sickness. At least I was, until I saw “Cloverfield”. But it was worth it!

gmoonster on January 27, 2008 at 12:24 PM

I still think “Little Nicky” was the worst movie I have ever seen. The only thing I thought was funny in there was the devil music in the Boston record.

Weebork on January 27, 2008 at 12:25 PM

I thought Cloverfield was horrible. Blair Witch with a budget and didn’t even manage to pull off half the suspense and has inspired a Ron Paul like conspiracy theory following on the net that is just disturbing.

bj1126 on January 27, 2008 at 12:26 PM

bj,

Ron Paul like conspiracy from the movie? Any chance you could give me a small rundown?

Weebork on January 27, 2008 at 12:28 PM

Also, at the very end, when the couple were in Central Park and get bombed to death, was that supposed to be a nuke going off or just a bunch of more bombs?

That plotpoint would have been counterprductive to the entire film. A nuke that close to ground zero would have vaporized the film evidence.

Also there is talk that “It’s Still Alive”.. part 2 will be the same incident from a different vantage point in the city. In otherwords same time, different place. I would imagine that it would provide more details to the incident. Possibly a professional crew documenting a “scientific find”. After all we’ve seen there is a HazMat crew involved at some point. Should still be raw footage tho’.

Oh well.. no “Blair Witch” (I had an image of Mike in the corner for days in my mind when I’d walk into a room) but decent fun. ;) I don’t have motion sickness!!

justice4ddd on January 27, 2008 at 12:31 PM

My daughter agreed… Mom would’ve hurled.

The best aspect of the film is being “in” the action, especially the mayhem when the military is involved. And the main characters display a surprising amount of unselfishness.

The elevated blood pressure (after a crabster bite) until you explode thing was pretty cool.

T J Green on January 27, 2008 at 12:36 PM

Yeah, the snack bar should have stocked Dramamine.

The middle section of the movie, when the camera’s right in the middle of the chaos, is astonishing. It was the stuff before and after that I didn’t like so much. It was like a yummy steak sandwich served on two slices of moldy white bread.

Jim Treacher on January 27, 2008 at 12:38 PM

Did anyone see the object fall from the sky?

tomas on January 27, 2008 at 12:38 PM

justice,

That’s a good point about the nuke. I was just trying to figure out what the big finish the military was talking about which required the evacuation of as many people out of the city as possible. It wasn’t merely a general evacuation, it was a specific evacuation to avoid a big boom. Perhaps it was a MOAB.

Weebork on January 27, 2008 at 12:39 PM

Jim,

Quite a good visual there! Ha!

Weebork on January 27, 2008 at 12:40 PM

I saw it yesterday. What an awesome movie. Good monster, great effects, good story. The theatre has a motion sickness warning at the ticket booth. It should have been bigger.

Cloverfield is a wild ride.

Rumour is…
“it’s still alive….“

Thats what I thought I heard. A sequel from a different point of view would be great idea.

alilianstrom on January 27, 2008 at 12:43 PM

Ron Paul like conspiracy from the movie? Any chance you could give me a small rundown?

Here you go. I don’t know if I’d go so far as “Ron Paul,” but it is pretty nutty. And, like Ron Paul, only people on the Internet care about it.

Jim Treacher on January 27, 2008 at 12:43 PM

The camera thing didn’t bother me at all. I would have liked some better shots of the monster but thats the point right.
Supposedly there is a tidbit in the happy coney island footage at the end of the movie that “explains” kinda the monters origin. It was just a hint at something… watch the skies!
Overall I liked it. It had explosions, stupid people dying, Military, and one hell of a monster.

HotAirExpert on January 27, 2008 at 12:51 PM

In the last shot of the film, a “flashback” to Coney Island, supposedly something can be seen splashing into the water at the horizon on the right-hand side of the screen. I didn’t notice it when I saw the movie, and haven’t re-watched it again to check, though I’ve heard from several people that it is indeed there. If so, it’s an Easter egg that does seem to provide at least the start of an explanation for the monster.

The movie made me horribly ill, physiologically, but I still appreciate its effort. It’s not at all a thought-provoking film, but it is a thoughtfully-constructed one, and that goes a long way these days.

Blacklake on January 27, 2008 at 12:53 PM

I agree Bryan, it was really dumb that their first instinct when meeting the army wasn’t to get that girl who was bitten immediate medical aid.
Also, I was screaming when they were trapped between the army and the monster Hud decided to film his friends yelling at him rather than to aim the camera at the creature while it was being fired at. That would have been the money shot!
Last thought. When the movie ended, practically the entire theater yelled “What the Hell!” Anybody else experience that?

redshirt on January 27, 2008 at 12:57 PM

The movie was great.

As the review said, what made this movie so good was all the unanswered questions. Slusho, the Japanese corporation, the thing falling at the end of the movie, the stuff on youtube, myspace etc. Like Lost the movie has more questions than answers.

arizonateacher on January 27, 2008 at 12:57 PM

I liked the handheld camera–I thought it was an effective storytelling device for this movie. Everyone has cameras now, and it makes sense that that’s how this story would be told if it happened in real life.

The main thing that bothered me throughout the movie was the camera’s unbelievably long battery life. I kept thinking, “Come on! No battery would last this long!”

aero on January 27, 2008 at 12:58 PM

I really wanted to see this but on school bus trips as a child, I had to take dramamine. I’ve always avoided moving camera games and films and kind of wonder if this is worth it, sitting way to the back of the theatre.

Canadian Infidel on January 27, 2008 at 1:09 PM

If anyone cares, the splashdown at the end of the movie would negate the viral idea that some japanese corp. dug up the creature at an off shore drilling site.
http://www.tagruato.jp/

HotAirExpert on January 27, 2008 at 1:14 PM

A steadier camera once the idea is established would have helped make Cloverfield more enjoyable.

not to mention less realistic, completely destroying the feeling the filmmaker was hoping to produce in the viewer.

its vintage duh on January 27, 2008 at 1:17 PM

people need to get over it. 9-11 was an attack on not just NYC, but the whole country. For all due respect New Yorkers, 9-11 was not about you.

Weebork on January 27, 2008 at 11:53 AM

Wow.

e-pirate on January 27, 2008 at 1:27 PM

I’m frankly glad that I read this before going to the theater. I’m not prone to motion sickness, but many first person shooter games make me queasy, so you KNOW this will.

I’d have been REAL pissed if I spent the money to see it and had to leave halfway through due to being ill.

Thanks, Guys!

tickleddragon on January 27, 2008 at 1:33 PM

Has “Part 2″ written all over it. Wasn’t there another guy and girl running down the street at the start of the movie with a camara that wasn’t part of the party goers party?

bubby62 on January 27, 2008 at 1:41 PM

Did anyone see the object fall from the sky?

tomas on January 27, 2008 at 12:38 PM

Yes. It answers the question of how the monster got there. If you haven’t seen it yet, watch carefully in that final clip guys – the Coney Island one. It seems extraneous, but it’s not. Watch near the cruise ship.

Loved this movie. I saw it twice with my 13 year old son. The second time we stayed to listen to the recorded voice at the end (after the interminable credits). We think it said: “It’s still alive. Now what?”

And the Hammderdown Protocol wasn’t nukes – otherwise the camera wouldn’t have survived. But they sure must’ve bombed the shit out of NYC, considering

Redhead Infidel on January 27, 2008 at 1:47 PM

I saw it and I too had set the bar pretty low, thoroughly expecting to get irritated at the shaky camera, but I was surprised and had a blast. I thought the conspiracy theory moment was a little tongue in cheek and meant to poke fun at truthers, people in the audience laughed when that part came up. I don’t know thats just the sense I got from it

Keli on January 27, 2008 at 1:51 PM

I liked it, but I have a hard time believing in an indestructible monster. How come it’s mini-me’s could be killed by a chich with a metal bar, but the biggie never got a scratch from thousands of pounds of explosives and ammunition? Give me a break… You can have realistic monster you know…

Luckedout on January 27, 2008 at 2:13 PM

The main thing that bothered me throughout the movie was the camera’s unbelievably long battery life. I kept thinking, “Come on! No battery would last this long!”

72 minutes? Not even that, since parts of the movie are “taped over” Rob’s old video. Everything else is “raw footage.” What we see is what was shot.

Jim Treacher on January 27, 2008 at 2:20 PM

I should say, the bulk of the movie is “taped over” Rob’s old video.

Jim Treacher on January 27, 2008 at 2:21 PM

My feeling is that over the last year or so, we have been slowly introduced to the effects used in this film (great special effects seamlessly incorporated into shaky hand-held video). Think back about all of the “UFO” sighting videos, etc that have shown up looking far more polished than any home-grown enthusiast could make. Even here at HotAir have links shown up.

I enjoyed the film…a lot Even though I suffered from motion sickness as a child, this film had no ill effect on me. I also remembered from Blair Witch warnings that if you are prone to it, then sit further back.

ej_pez on January 27, 2008 at 2:23 PM

Ron Paul like conspiracy from the movie? Any chance you could give me a small rundown?

Nothing to do with Ron Paul, or conspiracies. Cloverfield is a JJ Abrams movie. He relied partly on the obsessive “find the clues” ultra-Lost-geeks to spread word about the movie.

Lost. As in the TV show. JJ Abrams is the producer of both the show and the movie. The websites came out right after the first trailer for Cloverfield aired before Transformers, not after the movie came out.

rightwingprof on January 27, 2008 at 2:24 PM

72 minutes? Not even that, since parts of the movie are “taped over” Rob’s old video. Everything else is “raw footage.” What we see is what was shot.

Jim Treacher on January 27, 2008 at 2:20 PM

I guess you’re right. The impression you get is that he’s been filming all day, but you’re right that we see what was filmed, and much of the beginning was just a minute or two at a time. In terms of actual battery-time, it’s not long. The main point when I thought about the camera’s battery was when they used the camera’s spotlight as a flashlight in the tunnel, and I thought surely that would drain the battery in no time.

aero on January 27, 2008 at 2:35 PM

If anyone cares, the splashdown at the end of the movie would negate the viral idea that some japanese corp. dug up the creature at an off shore drilling site.

Yes. It answers the question of how the monster got there. If you haven’t seen it yet, watch carefully in that final clip guys – the Coney Island one. It seems extraneous, but it’s not. Watch near the cruise ship.

Ahh..but the splashdown was supposedly a satellite that fell, so was the monster on the satellite, making it fall?

JetBoy on January 27, 2008 at 2:35 PM

The best and most original monster movie I have ever seen! I agree too, the camera thing a few times was a bit much. It hurt my eyes and I had to turn away. Keeps you from wanting to go back a second time,, well,, sort of.

JellyToast on January 27, 2008 at 2:37 PM

Ahh..but the splashdown was supposedly a satellite that fell, so was the monster on the satellite, making it fall?

JetBoy on January 27, 2008 at 2:35 PM

When it comes out on DVD I’m gonna rent it, and comb through it with a fine tooth comb like the geek I am for any more ‘clues’ lol

Keli on January 27, 2008 at 2:39 PM

Jim Treacher on January 27, 2008 at 2:33 PM

I have an 8 hour battery for one of my cameras.

Bryan on January 27, 2008 at 2:42 PM

When it comes out on DVD I’m gonna rent it, and comb through it with a fine tooth comb like the geek I am for any more ‘clues’ lol

Keli on January 27, 2008 at 2:39 PM

You’re as “geek” as I am…I’ll be doing the same. You must be, like me, a LOST fanatic too! I don’t know, but with the way Cloverfield “ended”, I wouldn’t be suprised to see a sequel in the making…

JetBoy on January 27, 2008 at 2:53 PM

Have you seen “The Mist” (Stephen King)? That was much scarier than I expected. A little political stuff, worth seeing.

A powerful ending that almost makes me think King is pro military.

Agrippa2k on January 27, 2008 at 3:07 PM

I have an 8 hour battery for one of my cameras.

Right, that’s the point.

Jim Treacher on January 27, 2008 at 3:22 PM

I just saw the movie not even a 1/2 hour ago! Think of it as Godzilla Meets The Blair Witch With Some H.P. Lovecraft Cthulu Mythos Thrown In For Good Measure. If you like the feeling you have after riding a roller coaster, you will love this movie! I won’t give anymore than that away, except to say that I think the monster in the film may have some relative who played in Star Wars: Return Of The Jedi. Here’s a hint: Rancor.

pilamaye on January 27, 2008 at 3:41 PM

R U kidding me, cool giant bat monster with little parasite flea monsters that, when bitten by, makes you explode. Insert Homer Simpson slobbering noise here. Giant bat monster rips the head off the largest being “Statue Of Liberty” in the neighborhood and says “What?” chest pop then pose. Not since “There is no spoon” and “I know kung foo” have there been such boss movie stuff. Plus George Bush wasn’t blamed for any of it, bonus.

2Tru2Tru on January 27, 2008 at 4:11 PM

Too much emphasis on “realism” instead of giving me entertainment! Blair Witch crap is somewhat a con. The idea of not explaining why the monster is there could be considered refreshing but sometimes that’s the challenge of killing the monster. Kind of cheating not having to provide a reasons for the monster, like “Lost” writers making it up as they go.

Drtuddle on January 27, 2008 at 5:57 PM

It had to be an Alien- what else could take the whole load of bombs from a B-2 (what is that, 17 tons or so?) and walk away?

gmoonster on January 27, 2008 at 6:04 PM

Does the black guy die at the end? The black guy always dies at the end of sci-fi monster horror films.

Apeking on January 27, 2008 at 11:30 AM

Not always. Remeber Alien vs Predator? The only human left standing at the end was the Af-Am lady who was ice climbing at the beginning of the flick.

Texas Nick 77 on January 27, 2008 at 6:38 PM

Does the black guy die at the end? The black guy always dies at the end of sci-fi monster horror films.

Apeking on January 27, 2008 at 11:30 AM

Not always. Remeber Alien vs Predator? The only human left standing at the end was the Af-Am lady who was ice climbing at the beginning of the flick.

Texas Nick 77 on January 27, 2008 at 6:38 PM

Spoiler**

I thought Lilly was the only one “who technically made it” ?

kiakjones on January 27, 2008 at 7:17 PM

I actually liked the movie. I liked the fact that I didn’t know any of the actors, never heard from a 3rd party about what the monster was, and the fact that it took a while for us to see the monster. Like Bryan, I was impressed with the ingenuity of what the monster was. Not the typical Japanese monster fare. You don’t see much of him either, but enough to satisfy the horror palate. The things that fell off of it and crawled around reminded me of Aliens.. and when they got into the Military Medic compound with their friend, the one military officer screamed “BITE! WE’VE GOT A BITE” and with that the friend was whisked away. I knew it was all over when she was bleeding from the eyes.

I read reviews from the local website, and folks either liked it or they didn’t. I am one who did. When the movie was over, there was a couple behind us that whispered to each other “I can’t believe we sat through the whole thing.” I felt like asking them “then why did you?” LOL.

MsUnderestimated on January 27, 2008 at 7:38 PM

I’m still afraid of the end scene of The Blair Witch Project.

madmonkphotog on January 27, 2008 at 7:48 PM

The Star Trek Trailer at the beginning was better than the movie.

Bladerunner1701 on January 27, 2008 at 7:52 PM

blank star trek……

Just finished seeing Rambo. Awesome. a bit gruesome. Makes Passion of the Christ look like Ice Age.

The review of cloverfield is spot on. You know they will make a pre/sequel

JVelez on January 27, 2008 at 7:59 PM

Saw it today, not quite what I expected but it was a good way to kill a couple hours on a snowy sunday afternoopn

Viper1 on January 27, 2008 at 8:00 PM

Here you go. I don’t know if I’d go so far as “Ron Paul,” but it is pretty nutty. And, like Ron Paul, only people on the Internet care about it.

Jim Treacher on January 27, 2008 at 12:43 PM

Supposedly, the “Slush-O” drink’s secret ingredient is from the monster itself. The deep sea drilling platform was drilling into the monster.

In other words, they ripped off Futurama and “Slurm”.

Queasy on January 27, 2008 at 8:42 PM

Great,it sounds good but I have a problem with the camera traveling around the whole screen at light speed,me tends
to get dizzy!But I’ll buck-up for this one.

canopfor on January 27, 2008 at 10:55 PM

Let me preface this by saying I am a monster flick afficienado, I LOVE monster movies! And I’m going back to the fifties with thrillers like “The Liquid Monster”.

People, you really don’t need to go to the theatre to see this movie. Go downtown, take out your cel-phone and record a movie for 90 minutes while shaking it erratically the whole time. You have just seen almost all of Cloverfield. It had few characters, and no personalities. I’ve never seen a more vapid, self-centered, dumb bunch of young adults in any movie. None of them had the survival instincts of a grape. The whole city is being attacked all around them and nobody has or looks for any kind of a weapon. Of course that might offend their metrosexual sensitivities. Even when a woman is cut all to hell and bleeding terribly, they actually put one paper napkin on it and figured that was good enough. Ugh! They didn’t deserve to live! Most of the movie the camera moved around so fast, even when they showed the monster, that you only got blurry brief views of it. The only real clear steady shot lasted about five seconds. If you want to go see it, go ahead, I spend the entire first half of the movie looking at my watch and fighting the urge to leave.

Bikerken on January 27, 2008 at 11:14 PM

I’m surprised that so many on teh internets think the mystery of this movie is if the monster is an alien or secret Japanese drink ingredient. All those big brains should try cogitating on why all of these “regular people” live and work in NYC yet have no detectable Noo Yawk accents:

“Yo, didja heer dat? Sum kinda ertquake or–? Whaddafock?”
“Ay, Rob-BEE… Da woird on da street iz dere’s a muthafockin’ maunster smashin’ Manhattan.”
“Hud, we godda get da fock outta heer!”
“Lemme take dis camerah wid me…”

If you say: “That’s easy to explain because they just moved to NYC from [insert name of a midwestern American city where everyone apparently has diction similar to grad students from UCLA's Theater Arts Program] and haven’t had time to pick up that accent,” then please look me in the eye and tell me that if the movie centered around a monster attacking Houston, Texas that every single one of the main characters would NOT have outrageous hick accents while screaming that the monster “done crowled frum out uh th’ Book uh Rever’lashuns as Gawd’s punishmunt fer all them that’s sinned uhgahnst Him.”

Dude.

ScottMcC on January 28, 2008 at 1:44 AM

I hate to spoil the movie for you but the monster which knocks the head off the Statue of Liberty is Hillary, grown to be the sixty foot woman by doses of radiation.

The original Godzilla movie was inspired by an incident where a US nuclear test poisoned a catch of fish by a Japanese trawler. Since the Japanese eat mostly fish it had a big effect. That’s where the idea of a mutant monster coming out of the ocean came from. It also played off the fears from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I might also add the cardinal rule of monster movies which is that the monster threat is not truly serious until the Air Force, our premier military service, is called in to nuke it from the air. The fact is that the army, navy, and marines simply can’t handle your giant ants, scorpions, or alien invaders. Only the Air Force can put those monsters down.

Tantor on January 28, 2008 at 2:39 AM

Who says all that camera shake crap is realistic? I don’t. People try to make their shots steady, because crazy motion like that does make people ill.

I may see this if it hits the $5 bin at Walmart. maybe.

Thanks for the heads up.

dogsoldier on January 28, 2008 at 7:01 AM

The camera is shaky because the people are constantly running. Excellent movie!

William Teach on January 28, 2008 at 7:49 AM

Unfiction forums

Lots of fanboy stuff. I’ve been following the web stuff for months, very cool way of getting a lot of back story out of the way for very little.

The shot of the B2 coming in for the payload drop was one of the coolest things I have ever seen. The first person view really brought you in to the story.

And the sense of dread that the first Alien had was there, very claustrophobic.

benrand on January 28, 2008 at 8:47 AM

I am very susctible to motion sickness in movies. This bothered me at times during Cloverfield, but I got much more motion sickness out of Bourne Ultimatum.

Jimmy the Dhimmi, thanks for the link.

Had great fun at this movie.

My big problem with the movie is what little affect getting impaled through the shoulder for several hours had on that girl. Not very believable that, even with all the adrenalin, anyone could walk, run, or pull someone out a helicopter after being impaled.

Mig on January 28, 2008 at 9:18 AM

Went to see No Country again but the start time on Fandango was wrong, so we saw Cloverfield instead. I read most of the remarks above but not all, so if this has been said already sorry, but the 911 connection is so obvious that I couldn’t help but see the whole thing as an allegory of the “war on terror,” ending with us bombing/destroying ourselves. If so, maybe the big monster is Al Qaeda and the spidery little ones are congressional democrats, harrassing Americans from the edges during the battle and raising our blood pressure until our heads explode.

Akzed on January 28, 2008 at 9:22 AM

I always hate that kid. His presence in the film is always contrived and he’s given screen time that would better spent serving up more monster mayhem.

Then you might like this, Bryan: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cxV8Bf8ND4

I saw Rambo this weekend myself. I was impressed, it actually had a storyline and kept my attention. It was a good end for the character too (and no I’ve given nothing away).

srhoades on January 28, 2008 at 9:47 AM

The entire movie looks like a rip of the destruction of Zanarkand from the game Final Fantasy 10. The art work I’ve seen of the monster looks a lot like Sin. And like Sin, this guy has parasitic critters that drop off and attack everything. One last comparison between the two is the fact that the big baddie is after the main character. In the game it’s because the monster is the main characters father.

thekingtut on January 28, 2008 at 10:27 AM

I saw it last weekend with my daughter. I could not get passed the shaky camera so I just didn’t enjoy it that much, though the monster, when you got to see it, was AWESOME!

Wish I had known about the audio at the end and the something falling from the sky in the final shot. Abrams loves to plant easter eggs. Being a LOST nut, I should have remembered that and payed closer attention.

I also heard there were a few Lost references, very subtle and kept looking/listening for them but never saw any. No way I could have with everything being so shaky.

jewells45 on January 28, 2008 at 10:57 AM

Wish I had known about the audio at the end and the something falling from the sky in the final shot. Abrams loves to plant easter eggs. Being a LOST nut, I should have remembered that and payed closer attention.

I also heard there were a few Lost references, very subtle and kept looking/listening for them but never saw any. No way I could have with everything being so shaky.

jewells45 on January 28, 2008 at 10:57 AM

For fun, just google: lost cloverfield connection

There’s a few sites to poke around on, some giving some decent evidence that the Cloverfield monster may be realted to LOST.

JetBoy on January 28, 2008 at 11:34 AM

Thanks for the info. I’ll go check it out.

jewells45 on January 28, 2008 at 11:49 AM

oh, my head… Saw it Sunday.

Looking at these spoilers, during certain parts, I just closed my eyes until the scene changed. It saved me a bit.

Come on, arsehule director, STEADY CAM!! Even COPS has them. IF you have to put out a press release apologizing for making people sick, then you screwed up. Chalk this up under “what not to do…”

Otherwise, Liked it, cool concept. This opens up some fan fiction ideas, too.

Mazztek on January 28, 2008 at 12:39 PM

The Dharma Initiative logo appears in the opening shot.

Akzed on January 28, 2008 at 2:00 PM

blank star trek……

Just finished seeing Rambo. Awesome. a bit gruesome. Makes Passion of the Christ look like Ice Age.

The review of cloverfield is spot on. You know they will make a pre/sequel

JVelez on January 27, 2008 at 7:59 PM

LOL Thats what I wish I had saved my money for!

Bladerunner1701 on January 28, 2008 at 4:29 PM

Ah so FINALLY my slusho shirt came in the mail. I wanted to wear it for the premiere :(

RoPa4life on January 29, 2008 at 4:43 PM