Science Fiction & Fantasy : Cloverfield [2007]

Cloverfield [2007]

£11.97


One of the first things a viewer notices about Cloverfield is that it doesn t play by ordinary storytelling rules, making this intriguing horror film as much a novelty as an event. Told from the vertiginous point-of-view of a camcorder-wielding group of friends, Cloverfield begins like a television soap opera about young Manhattanites coping with changes in their personal lives. Rob (Michael Stahl-David) is leaving New York to take an executive job at a company in Japan. At his goodbye party in a crowded loft, Rob’s brother Jason (Mike Vogel) hands a camcorder to best friend Hud (T.J. Miller), who proceeds to tape the proceedings over old footage of Rob’s ex-girlfriend, Beth (Odette Yustman)--images shot during happy times in their ex-relationship. Naturally, Beth shows up at the party with a new beau, bumming Rob out completely. Just before one s eyes glaze over from all this heartbreaking stuff (captured by Hud, who s something of a doofus, in laughably shaky camerawork), the unexpected happens: New York is suddenly under attack from a Godzilla-like monster stomping through midtown and destroying everything and everybody in sight. Rob and company hit the streets, but rather than run with other evacuees, they head toward the center of the storm so that Rob can rescue an injured Beth. There are casualties along the way, but the journey into fear is fascinating and immediate if emotionally remote--a consequence of seeing these proceedings through the singular, subjective perspective of a camcorder and of a story that intentionally leaves major questions unanswered: Who or what is this monster? Where did it come from? The lack of a backstory, and spare views of the marauding creature, are clever ways by producer J.J. Abrams and director Matt Reeves to keep an audience focused exclusively on what’s on the screen. But it also makes Cloverfield curiously uninvolving. Ultimately, Cloverfield, with its spectacular effects brilliantly woven into a home-video look, is a celebration of infinite possibilities in this age of accessible, digital media. -Tom Keogh

God Awful - Well what can i say week s of adverts all building up to what i thought would be the most coolest monster ever, I was so horribly wrong. You see the monster once properly and he s so plain it s unbelievable. Another thing that was crap about this movie is the fact that i hated all the characters in the film none of them where at all likable, even worse is the fact that the two worst characters were the guy holding the camera who s just a straight up loser and the main character who s leading all his friends to death by going on some bizarre journey to some woman you would of thought would of been dead. What i think was even more annoying was the fact that they hardly even explained where the monster came from... oh no wait a second i think at one point the camera man comes up with a theory. Wait just one minute so this complete idiots theory is all we have to go on with how the monster came about without anyone ever noticing it even though it s massive. I ve said enough this film was worse than watching a monkey pick it s nose.

NOT VERY GOOD - ALTHOUGH MY WIFE LIKED THIS I WAS NOT SO IMPRESSED WHERE DID THE MONSTER COME FROM HOW DID THE CAMERA LAST SO LONG WITH ALL THE US FIRE POWER AND STILL NOT A SCRATCH ON THE MONSTER SO MANY OTHER QUESTIONS NEEDED ANSWERING DONT EXPECT TO MUCH FROM THIS VERY SHORT FILM

Blair Witch meets Mimic meets Alien - The shaky camera techniques aside (used so well in films like Saving Private Ryan and the 2nd and 3rd of The Bourne movies) Cloverfield has nothing new to say really. I love horror and sci-fi, so desperately tried to enjoy this / be amazed but it didn t pull me in. Characters that had no depth .....despite, or in spite of...the fly on the wall technique. The characters always came across as actors trying to look and sound as though they weren t acting. Furthermore, it s unavoidable for the viewer not to reference with 9/11 at some point.. intentionally or not on behalf of the film makers... the surprise and shock of what s suddenly happening...the smoke and ash raining down..the location of New York...the horror of the destruction.......the desperate attempt of the central character to reach and save his girl....all of this did strike a chord, but somehow failed to be sufficiently moving within the context of the movie, but almost achieved that with the juxtaposition of the interspersed camera clips of normal day to day footage left on the camcorder. All in all a brave attempt to do something different with the genre, that didn t quite make the grade.

What s the point of this film? - Exactly what the title says - what s the point? Why make it? Its been done before so many times over and over. A monster destroys a city. And its always New York that gets destroyed. A stupid idea to completely ignore the start and finish of a film and think that just showing a section of the middle is great film making. Yes they will make another one which may or may not explain why the thing is there and where it came from. But again it will be another unoriginal film in a genre that has no fresh ideas. Most people may not care enough to want to go and see it. I m one of them.

Not quite a victory rampage but.... - To be fair, Cloverfield was enjoyed by my girlfriend and I. It is an interesting take on the monster arrives and destroys everything genre, as it focussed on the civilian aspect (ie, ruuuunnn) rather than the military view (lets hunt, kill, and make lizard burgers). It s all shot on a handheld camcorder, and so often there are shades of Blair Witch about it.That said, even though it is only 90mins, it still feels like it is too long, and could probably do with being 10 minutes shorter. And some of the character decisions and plot holes really leave you scratching your head.But on the whole, quite enjoyable and a little outside of the norm to stand out.




Cloverfield [2007]