Cloverfield

TheCentralScrutinizer · 17 Jan 08 :: 04:26

I'm not sure if I'm going to like it or not, but it sounds pretty good and I'm intrigued about the monster.

Here's a deliberately unspoilery review...

Unleash the Beast: Cloverfield
Jan 16 '08
Product Rating: 5.0
Pros
Great FX, solid direction.
Cons
Nothing, really.
The Bottom Line
The best monster movie in a long time.
Full Review
After what seems like an eternity filled with rumored name changes (I've lost count of how many names this film has "reportedly" had during its production), insane viral marketing, countless television ads, and a hype level just a notch below Snakes on a Plane, Cloverfield is finally upon us. I've got to be honest—I've been all over the place with this film in the year or so leading up to its release. I was excited early on, I stuck with it through the viral campaign, but I started to suspect the film might be an exercise in style over substance as it got closer to release. Now that I've seen the film, I can tell you first hand that it delivers the goods. Cloverfield is an intense and engaging monster movie that may very well breathe life back into a dead genre while demonstrating that there's fertile soil left to be tilled in this particular cinematic field.
It's May in the Big Apple and a group of hip young urbanites are having a going away party for their buddy Rob. Suddenly, the lights start to flicker and explosions boom in the distance. Everything goes nuts. The four main characters decide to flee the city, but change their plans when they discover that one of their friends is trapped in a mound of debris. They decide to save him, which leads to an adventure filled with close calls, wicked monsters, death, and unexpected twists. J.J. Abrams, director Matt Reeves, and screenwriter Drew Goddard clearly understand that the best way to tell these sorts of stories is to keep it simple and keep it moving.
The plot certainly isn't deep and owes at least a nod to films like The Blair Witch Project and Ruggero Deodato's infamous Cannibal Holocaust. Like those two films, Cloverfield utilizes a lot of documentary-styled handheld footage and discovered footage from other sources to fill in gaps in the story. The big difference between Cloverfield and The Blair Witch Project is that Cloverfield actually shows its monster.
And what a monster it is. When the beast from Cloverfield makes his onscreen debut, the monster movie geek in me was very pleased. Any giant monster movie is only as good as the creature everyone's running from (or in the case of Godzilla, rooting for), and this is another spot where Abrams and company got it right. I was impressed with the creature from The Host, but the Cloverfield beast just blows it away. I think at least part of the reason it works as well as it does is because of the decision to use the handycam footage. The first person perspective gives the events unfolding onscreen a very "you are there" vibe and makes the effects seem somehow more real—probably because there's less distance between the viewer and the action onscreen.
The film's cast is filled primarily with newcomers (Michael Stahl-David, Mike Vogel, Lizzy Caplan, and Jessica Lucas) which was another good choice. The film works because the characters aren't people who're stars playing a role. Sure, everyone in the film looks like they stepped out of an Abercrombie & Fitch catalogue, but since we don't recognize most of them as actors, we're allowed to buy into the whole "this is real" vibe set up by the filming style. This is essentially the same approach Blair Witch took, and once again it works. No one will be winning acting awards for their work in Cloverfield, but everyone in the cast does a fine job reacting to a monster that isn't even there.
Perhaps the greatest thing about Cloverfield as a whole is that it runs a sparse 80 minutes. In an age where every filmmaker thinks he needs to be Peter Jackson and make four hour movies, it's refreshing to see a genre film that comes in, hits you hard, then sends you on your way. The film has a story to tell, and it tells it in a fashion that never flags from the beginning until the end credits roll. Again, the decision is a sound one—the film is more intense with its short running time because there are no wasted moments. Set-pieces come fast and furious and the audience rarely has a chance to catch their breath as one problem is solved just as another takes center stage. That's good filmmaking—hopefully more production people will emulate it.
Don't let all of that fool you into thinking there's no subtext in the film, though. Cloverfield may be a simple monster movie at its heart, but like Godzilla before it, there's definitely things happening beneath the surface. Godzilla was largely a way for the Japanese to deal with the horror of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings in World War II. Cloverfield appears to be something of an attempt for us to look back at the horror of 9/11 and move forward. It's not particularly deep, but it's certainly there.
So, after what seems like an eternity of waiting, Cloverfield is finally here—and the wait was worth it. Don't get me wrong—it isn't high art or anything that will change your life. What it is is a damn good monster movie—something we haven't had in quite awhile (well, except for The Host). This is something of a rarity for Hollywood these days—a hyped up event film that actually lives up to its buzz and becomes a genuine event. Fans of creature features will undoubtedly enjoy this, while more casual film fans who don't mind genre flicks will find much to like as well. Bravo, J.J. Abrams, bravo.

Recommended:
Yes

magicalturkey · 17 Jan 08 :: 05:51

I just really wanna know what the monster is...

TheCentralScrutinizer · 17 Jan 08 :: 06:08

Search "Cloverfield monster" on YouTube and you can see frame-by-frame analysis of the quick glimpse in the trailer. You can see his legs quite clearly. Some reviews indicate more than one monster, but one big mamma jamma.

magicalturkey · 17 Jan 08 :: 06:16

On IMDb there's a sketch of the monster(s) someone did. The people who saw the movie said it's almost exactly what the monster(s) look like.

TheCentralScrutinizer · 17 Jan 08 :: 06:31

Link? It's late, I'm lazy.

magicalturkey · 17 Jan 08 :: 06:37

The face is apparently off, too cartoony. The artist points out what he couldn't capture accurately or drew wrong...
http://imdb.com/title/tt1060277/board/thread/94920330

TheCentralScrutinizer · 17 Jan 08 :: 06:46

That comes close to some of the stuff I found last night. I saw a couple of similar things that walked on all fours sometimes. In the frame-by-frame breadown, I thought the legs looked like a T-Rex. But that's all you can see. From the thigh to just below the knee. Looked awfully green too.

Chnyst · 19 Jan 08 :: 02:16

Well, I originally planned on seeing this tonight,
but I got outta work early today and snuck off to see it while Jacen was still in school.
I just wanted to make a few quick points-and there's probably gonna be a few mild spoilers so proceed with caution.
Those sketches are pretty close to what the 'thing' looks like. Those lil 'sacs' on the side of his head inflate/deflate as he breathes which looks pretty cool. It's really hard to get a good look at the thing throughout the movie, as they kinda tease you throughout, but towards the end, you get a good look at his face/torso . A friend of mine asked me today what the monster looked like and I really couldn't think of anything to compare it to-it's like a combination of different beasts yet has a unique quality all it's own.
As far as the movie goes, I must say I really enjoyed it. The visuals were great-you truly felt like you were in the middle of this attack and witnessing the destruction of New York City. The motion of the camera didn't bother me one bit-sure, there's a lot of shaky photography and quick cuts and movement, but it didn't throw off the flow of the movie at all in my opinion. I remember when I saw the Blair Witch in the theaters and as I was walking out, I could hear one person after another complaining about motion sickness-I was 'too into' this film for that to even be an issue. The acting wasn't blow-you-away spectacular, but it was a much better job than your typical monster movie acting. There was some good humor thrown in as well.
At the end of the film, I couldn't help but wonder, Where did the monster come from? What is the monster? What happened to him? What is Cloverfield? What happened to their friend that was bit? But despite having some loose ends(as expected since we're only seeing one point of view) I had fun watching this.
I look forward to reading everyone else's thoughts too once they see this.

oh, and watch out!! The Monster has fleas!!

TheCentralScrutinizer · 28 Jan 08 :: 01:29

Saw it yesterday.

I think they were trying to say that people who were bitten turned into monsters or something. You see them drag Marlena behind that curtain and then something bites off someone's head. That should've been a little clearer, but it was still disturbing. When they were up on the roof, looking down at the monster, that really wigged me out. The little monsters were like something out of the Alien movies. Fast and terrifying. I absolutely loved the Cloverfield Overture over the end credits. It was just a fantastic homage to all the great monster movies of the past. I stayed for the whole thing.

I don't really know what "cloverfield" itself was supposed to mean, but I saw some of that show on the History Channel this week called, Life After People (or whatever it was). They mentioned that clover can grown anywhere, and showed the city streets of New York literally becoming a clover field. Maybe that was the idea.

TeeJay · 03 Feb 08 :: 21:05

I just got back home, having watched this one. Seeing how I generally tend to avoid spoilers as much as I can, I have to admit that I went into this one pretty blindly. I knew that New York was being attacked and that there was a guy named Rob, a monster and that there would be a lot of handheld camera.

I didn't know the whole movie was gonna be handheld camera. But though it did annoy me for about two minutes in the beginning, I got used to it. Didn't bother me much at the end anymore. And I thought it really added something to the atmosphere. There were a few moments where I was really drawn in, where I felt as terrified as the characters must have felt. That was really well done.

I wasn't all that curious about what the monster looked like. All you really needed to know was that it was terrifying as shit. LOL But it was still pretty cool. And scary. And, like Sean, I left the cinema, thinking about all the unanswered quesitons that you keep wondering about. I think that's what I like most about the movie. It takes you on a wild ride and it leaves you guessing. Things like: Did they ever manage to kill the monster and its offspring? Did they managed to save Manhattan? Did Rob and Beth really die? How on earth did they recover the tape? Why didn't the monster eat Hud? (Seemed like a waste to kill him and then leave him behind. But then you only saw his head...) Why the hell is the movie called Cloverfield? Where did the monster come from? Are there more of it?

And isn't it kind of tragic that they went back there to save one girl, they even found and rescued her, and in the end they all got killed? Though we don't know about Lily. She got on the first chopper, she might have made it.

Overall, I really enjoyed it. Though it's not a movie I'd go watch a second time or buy on DVD. Unless I find it in a bargain bin some time.

Last but not least: I don't think I've ever watched end credits roll by in such silence. The ending was so abrupt, it literally took you that first, music-less silent minute of end credits to digest what just happened. People in the theater only started talking after the music started. Deb, you said you liked the music for the end credits. I hated it. I sat through it until the end (because I always do when I can), but I thought it was awful. Just my personal opinion.

One more thing I was wondering, while we're talking about music... There was no real score, was there? Or at least if there was, it must have been subtle, I certainly can't remember any scenes that were accompanied by instrumental music. Yet, there were about 15 or 20 songs that scrolled by in the end credits. Where was all that music used??? There was some at the party, but that's all I remember. That can't have been 20 different songs, can it?

-TeeJay

TheCentralScrutinizer · 03 Feb 08 :: 21:49

No music, except that which was overheard. How could there be a real "score" when the whole movie is basically footage from one guy's camera? That would take you right out of the story and ruin the whole thing. And maybe you gotta be something of a monster-movie fan to appreciate the end overture. Like I said, it was intended as an homage to those films.

TeeJay · 03 Feb 08 :: 21:53

Yeah, I didn't think there was any music. It wouldn't have fit, you're right. But I wasn't so sure since often I'm prone not to notice music unless it was something that really stood out.

-TeeJay

Illinoisguy1 · 03 Feb 08 :: 22:01

I haven't seen the movie yet, but I grew up watching the old Godzilla, Rodan, Mothra and Gamera films on tv - so this looks like something I would like. Heck I even like the 1998 Godzilla film which seems that most hate.

I have seen pics of the creature on the net and it appears that the head looks somewhat snake-like from the front, but kind of human like from the side.

I've also read that the scene where the woman goes behind the screen and something happens the before that happened she was bitten by one of those small creatures. I guess it would be possible that since she was bitten that sometime later the babies emerged from her and that is what was hinted at.

Perhaps we'll get an unrated version of the film when it gets released on DVD.

OhGnarly · 24 Feb 08 :: 22:48

I finally dragged my brother to see this the other day. Amazing! Though I saw the trailer back in July and anticipated the movie for months, I never took the time to look it up online, so I missed all of the incredible viral marketing. The back story for Cloverfield is as interesting as the movie itself - I urge everyone who's seen it to go to http://geeksofdoom.com/2008/01/22/clove … -millions/ and read all about Tagruato and Slusho, the companies that were seemingly involved with the attack. It explains where exactly the monster came from, what caused it to start attacking NYC, and it touches on what happened to Marlena after she was bitten (my guess is that getting bitten by one of those parasites allows some strange bacteria to get into your system, causing your body to swell, overheat, and eventually explode).

On our way out, my friend and brother were all in hysterics about seeing the shadowed object fall into the water at the end of the movie, which was something I missed. We also didn't know to stay until the end of the credits to hear "Help us" (which, when reversed, sounds like "It's still alive"). And having looked at all of the clues that were presented to the fans before the movie's actual release, I think I've gotta go see it again.

And from the looks of it, I think there will be a sequel. J.J. Abrams has said that if they do another one, it will be told from another person's perspective on the same night. Very, very cool.

Last edited by OhGnarly (24 Feb 08 :: 22:48)

TheCentralScrutinizer · 24 Feb 08 :: 23:05

I didn't follow any of that either. Sounds very cool. I'll look into it!

Illinoisguy1 · 07 Apr 08 :: 22:18

Exclusive Best Buy bonus dvd info.

When Paramount Home Entertainment drops Cloverfield into stores on DVD Tuesday, April 22nd, there will be one place to get more bonus features than what's included on the disc.

ShockTillYouDrop.com has exclusively learned Best Buy is offering a bonus disc entitled "TJ Miller's Video Diary" (artwork below). It will include nearly 30-minutes of behind-the-scenes footage with T.J. Miller - the talkative, and resilient, camera operator of the film.

Miller made his feature debut with Matt Reeves' monster flick, he'll next star in the romantic comedy She's Out of My League for Dreamworks.

clover%20bonus%20disc%20sleeve.jpg

http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/news/to … hp?id=5505

Illinoisguy1 · 25 Apr 08 :: 23:36

Got it today from Best Buy. Their exclusive dvd didn't come in the nice sleeve that's pictured above, just a plain white envelope.

Anyways. here are my thoughts.

The beginning is kind of boring with them going to the party up till the first attack. But once the attack happens it gets much better. I must say the best thing about the movie is the sound. Really great sound and sound effects throughout the movie. The way they slowly reveal the creature is similar to Jaws. The creature design is a disappointment imo. I don't think it'll become iconic like Godzilla.

My favorite scenes is the very first military attack on the creature. Very well done. Then of course the finale where they fully reveal the creature from above.

Some things I didn't like. The Hud character. His constant saying "Oh my God" and "Shit" over and over got annoying. It's a little hard to know the characters or to follow where they are sometimes in the scene. Some of the scenes are a tad too dark which makes following what is happening on screen difficult at times.

Overall better than Enchanted, but not as good as it could have been. I think I would say on a scale of 1-10 I would give it a 7

Chris Marquette Message Board

#1 17 Jan 08 :: 04:26

Cloverfield

#2 17 Jan 08 :: 05:51

Re: Cloverfield

#3 17 Jan 08 :: 06:08

Re: Cloverfield

#4 17 Jan 08 :: 06:16

Re: Cloverfield

#5 17 Jan 08 :: 06:31

Re: Cloverfield

#6 17 Jan 08 :: 06:37

Re: Cloverfield

#7 17 Jan 08 :: 06:46

Re: Cloverfield

#8 19 Jan 08 :: 02:16

Re: Cloverfield

#9 28 Jan 08 :: 01:29

Re: Cloverfield

#10 03 Feb 08 :: 21:05

Re: Cloverfield

#11 03 Feb 08 :: 21:49

Re: Cloverfield

#12 03 Feb 08 :: 21:53

Re: Cloverfield

#13 03 Feb 08 :: 22:01

Re: Cloverfield

#14 24 Feb 08 :: 22:48

Re: Cloverfield

#15 24 Feb 08 :: 23:05

Re: Cloverfield

#16 07 Apr 08 :: 22:18

Re: Cloverfield

#17 25 Apr 08 :: 23:36

Re: Cloverfield

Board footer