The teaser trailer for Cloverfield, the latest film from geeky wunderkind producer, J.J. Abrams, sent fanboys into a frenzy when it premiered before Transformers last summer. Shot in an amateurish, vérité style, the trailer depicted a typical party full of young people in downtown Manhattan interrupted by the sounds of explosions. The party spills out onto the roof just in time to see a huge object come flying through the air and crash onto the street—it takes a few moments to realize it’s the head of the Statue of Liberty. After that, the screen webt black. What was that?
Viewers of the trailer freaked out, understandably. Abrams had transitioned from cult hero to mainstream auteur thanks to the success of Alias, Lost, and Mission Impossible III. Audiences were also excited to see a fresh, imaginative take on the traditional monster movie, and the decision to feed the audience just enough information to get them excited without revealing too much created tremendous buzz. Additionally, Abrams team developed a viral marketing “game” that allowed engaged fans to find out clues about the films’ back story that further bolstered fan excitement.
But the movie has to stand on its own terms, and unfortunately, this one can’t quite match the hype. I loved the movie in theory, and enjoyed it hypothetically, but for some reason it didn’t quite come together as well as I hoped it would. The movie begins at a going-away party for Rob (Michael Stahl-David), held by his brother Jason (Mike Vogel) and Jason’s girlfriend Lily (Jessica Lucas), and videotaped by his best friend Hud (T.J.Miller). The party is soon interrupted by the monster attack described above, and while the military moves in quickly, total chaos rules in the streets. An attempted escape over the Brooklyn Bridge backfires, and a panicked message from Rob’s former fling Beth (Odette Yustman) sends the group of young people uptown to rescue her as the monster wreaks havoc on the city.
The first half of the movie is great, up to the point that they head off to rescue Beth. It’s totally terrifying because you’re in the position of the main characters—you have no idea what the monster is, why it’s attacking or how the government or the military are dealing with it. The effect of being in the middle of the action with no additional information makes for a truly creepy experience, and the tiny glimpses of the monster that the camera picks up add to the atmosphere. But after a certain point, the characters feel increasingly unlikable, their choices seem more and more foolish, and the jumpy camera movements just become headache-inducing. This is one of those movies that I liked a lot when I thought about it in the abstract, but actually watching it started to get tedious after a while.
If you love monster movies, science fiction, or everything J.J. Abrams, you’ll be able to overlook the less satisfying elements and appreciate the movie for what it is, but if the idea of it didn’t appeal to you right away, this may be one to skip.
What did you think of Cloverfield?
Wow. Awesome maturity blockylemon. Cool name though.
[1] Posted by: theJamexican | January 31st, 2008 at 9:18 pmI saw this movie. I didn’t like it very much, it wasn’t as scary as I thought it would be. But it was OK, I guess.
[2] Posted by: Eivorygirl | February 1st, 2008 at 6:53 pmThought it was massively awesome if you overlook whiny cast. Wonder if Abrams is gonna do a sequel? It’s certainly got potential for it.
[3] Posted by: kohikora | February 3rd, 2008 at 12:44 amThere is a sequel (according to some source or another) and there will be more than one if the first sequel goes well and each one will be from a different perspective (from a different character’s point of view). I am not excited about this and will not pay money to see it. I could hardly stay to watch the first one. All of the constant movement and jerkiness of the camcorder made me feel like I was going to throw-up on the guy in front of me and I couldn’t really get into the story. The characters annoyed me and the first half of it being at a party for a guy I don’t care about annoyed me and feeling like I was on a roller coaster for an hour and a half also annoyed me. I wouldn’t recommend seeing this movie with out some pepto-bismal and a couple of advil or something. You might like it though… oh, also at the very end, if you wait through the 15 minutes of credits, you hear a voice say,
[4] Posted by: soccersweep87 | February 5th, 2008 at 10:22 amI don’t think this movie was intended to be “scary” so mucha s just to keep the audience questioning. Abrams used the monster idea to keep the everyone intrigued. I though it was awesome how he made a feature length blockbuster with an everyday movie camera you can buy at best buy.
I also heard speak of a sequel. Abrams said that if he does do one, it will be the same exact story, just from the view of someone else, that the kids didn’t know. Either that or from the view of the monster.
I do think if it was about a half an hour longer, it would’ve been better though.
[5] Posted by: sizematters238 | February 5th, 2008 at 8:45 pmSaw the movie, overall it was ok, the ending was a little hmm what word am i looking for…cliche. The only major problem that i had with it was the camera movements, i spent half of the movie looking at my lap so i didn’t throw up. At the end of the movie i was a little angry because i just paid to get motion sickness.
[6] Posted by: sfnssoccer05 | February 6th, 2008 at 10:17 pmmy friend told me that i should go and see this movie, but he emphasized that i should NOT pay for it!!! i haven’t seen it yet but his mom did say that the camera motions were a little annnoying…
[7] Posted by: raineofheaven | February 7th, 2008 at 9:33 amI ABSOLUTLY LOVED THE MOVIE!! IT FELT SOOO REAL… I THOUGHT IT WAS AMAZING
[8] Posted by: Colleeeeeeen420 | February 8th, 2008 at 2:41 pmI thought it was a great movie! But it made me feel nauseous (because of the shaky camera), so I had to close my eyes for half the time.
[9] Posted by: withlovexsqualor | February 9th, 2008 at 3:16 pmoh come on guys! the camera movements were not that bad. i never really felt sick at all. the movie is COMPLEATLY intriging, and you are absorbed into the film. the documentary style camerawork puts you right were the action is. The story, however, is very shallow with a ton of exaggerated plot ideas. The main charecters survive an alien attack (compleate with scratch and bites), countless random exsplosions, climbing into an unsturdy biulding ; they even magange to live through a helicopter crash, but yet they die from rubble that falls on them. I was soo pissed at this ending, but overall the movie is powerfull and surreal. I just wish they could have more of a story behind it rather than running from biulding to biulding, trying to survive, only to be killed by rocks.
[10] Posted by: Muzicman17 | February 10th, 2008 at 10:15 pmI enjoyed the movie. It wasn’t supposed to be scary. It was intruiging. Something about the make of the monster makes the mind want to see it again and again and analyze what it is.. I loved it and I’m buying it
[11] Posted by: OtakuKitnus | February 15th, 2008 at 2:57 pmBesides. You were warned about the motion sickness.
[12] Posted by: OtakuKitnus | February 15th, 2008 at 2:59 pmthe camera work wasn’t the best, but i never had to just look away fromt he screen becuz i was felign sick or somthing. the movie had a good plot and all, but the ending keeps you questioning which is probably whatt he wanted. over al the monsters freaked me out, didn’t scare me to death, just freaked me out, they were so fast and looked like spiders, and at first i didn’t knwo what was falling off of his back, and when they did or some time later and the screen went black all you could here was this one lady go
[13] Posted by: Bblahblah | February 18th, 2008 at 7:00 pm“All hell na.” and that was exactly how veryone was feeling, cuz everyone in the theater (which was packed!) satrted laughing thier heads off including me. so it was okay and all.
I thought it was a good movie but the camera angle was very nauseating and the plot was a little weird
[14] Posted by: SpeechGeek2 | February 22nd, 2008 at 2:20 pmthis movie was off the hook!!!!! it was very amazing!!! i was so realistic to me!!
[15] Posted by: jonnylovesbass | February 22nd, 2008 at 2:35 pmhey peeps!!
[16] Posted by: Chelsy01 | February 28th, 2008 at 12:44 pmHey back.
theJamexican
[17] Posted by: theJamexican | February 28th, 2008 at 9:08 pmwuz good…..
[18] Posted by: Chelsy01 | February 29th, 2008 at 10:32 amhey do any of yall kno how to email peeps like sparkfriends or is diz tha place if ya kno anything then hit me up iight…..
[19] Posted by: Chelsy01 | February 29th, 2008 at 10:40 amThe movie was ok. I don’t think it was really my kind of flick. The cast was great though. But, I must admit, I felt like throwing up after. But the monster was pretty cool, although it was cheesy.
[20] Posted by: Sweeney6067 | March 11th, 2008 at 3:17 pmit was lame
[21] Posted by: crazyjessfosho | March 29th, 2008 at 1:46 pmThe film was not worth all the hype. When i first saw the trailer way back before it came out, it looked so awesome and i had really high hopes. Then i saw it. The first half is damn promising, then the characters begin to really piss you off with their retarded decisions, the camera movements get annoying after a while, and the ending just leaves you with tons of questions…not so much about the movie itself but why on earth you paid to watch it. I can only hope that Diary of The Dead (another in the line of home video camera point of view movies coming soon) does not fail where this film did, and also hope the characters in that movie have steadier hands…..
[22] Posted by: PvtWagz | April 6th, 2008 at 8:28 pmI liked it. I thought it was well done, and, aside from the jerkiness of the camera, I wasn’t disappointed in the film. Given, the characters made moderately retarded decisions, but they were human ones. Rather, I was unhappy with the fact that people didn’t like the ending. I believe the movie was supposed to hold your attention by giving you the feel that you were with these people in the midst of the panic. Honestly, if that happened here, I’d be scared shxtless…movies don’t have to have zombies and chainsaws eviscerating babies coupled with a threatening score to be frightening. We’re just desensitized, because if that happened here (California), our groggy American asses would flail in terror. I think people should give it more credit, it was an experimental film that tried to include the audience.
[23] Posted by: Kelsinatorrr | April 8th, 2008 at 11:40 amI liked most of it, but what was with the people exploding after the mini-monsters bit them? That was just too much.
[24] Posted by: rogueXphile | April 11th, 2008 at 12:22 amI liked the movie. So what if you didn’t know what, how, and why? It was an experience more than anything. If you’re bothered by a movie leaving you to your own assumptions, skip it. I won’t say sorry for liking my movies with a side of chaos. And that chick exploding like a water balloon after being bit? Awesome!
[25] Posted by: HighClassTrash | April 16th, 2008 at 3:39 pmI want my money back!!
[26] Posted by: jiznut | April 23rd, 2008 at 4:06 pmi thought it was awesome, luckily i wasnt affected by the shaky camera too much
[27] Posted by: xzeldax3 | April 28th, 2008 at 8:20 pmIts about time some other people agree with me. thank you crazyjessfosho and jiznut or making me feel like I’m not the only one on this page to post a negative comment. I know I said the movie was ok and all, but now that I think about it, i found it unconditionally bad.
[28] Posted by: Sweeney6067 | April 29th, 2008 at 10:33 pmthat was such a good movie!!! plus the girl who plays beth used to be my next door neighbor.
[29] Posted by: patdlover1120 | May 4th, 2008 at 9:40 pmshe is sooo nice!!!!