« Those Glasses are Famous | Main | The Ettatorial for the Week of 1-16-08 »
Cloverfield-A Review
By Etta | January 19, 2008
I normally leave the movie reviews to Jason and Jay on the podcast, or in person, but I figured a few words were in order for a movie with a large amount of hype and an interesting marketing campaign behind it. The movie in particular I’m talking about is Cloverfield.
My wife and I went to see Cloverfield in an afternoon matinee (what can I say, I’m cheap, and if the movie sucked, I’m not out all that much). After a surprisingly short amount of commercials (quick aside-if I’m paying to watch your movie, quit making me watch your damn commercials, or cut ticket prices) and some trailers, a few of them even decent (Iron Man), the movie began. I’m not going to sit here and give you the blow by blow, or spoilers (there’s plenty available on the internet, and I personally hate spoilers), but I’ll try to put into words what makes Cloverfield an enjoyable movie, and past that, something that may mark a turning point in movies.
I’m not what you’d call a fan of monster movies, which is what Cloverfield is when you get right down to it. But I am a fan of originality is storytelling, and Cloverfield has that. Told almost like a documentary, or partly like the Blair Witch Project (which I’m not particulary a fan), the movie is shot totally hand held, which makes for some interesting shots and angles in it’s storytelling. While it also leads to some chop and quick cuts, this is all in the spirit of the movie, and understandable. Those with motion sickness may want to avoid the film though, as I imagine its a nightmare for those that have it.
With all the focus on how the movie is shot and told, you may get the idea that it’s all style with no substance. You’d actually be wrong, with the movie having a point (while not something earth shattering, it’s a monster movie at heart after all, it’s still a point) and also a surprising amount of character moments. By the end of the movie, you know the characters you’re dealing with, and understand their actions. All the cast being no-names, it’s hard to think the actors and actresses could all do a serviceable job to the story, but it actually leads to a more believable telling, making the story really seem real (as a monster movie can be).
As for the monster, a large amount of the anticipation from certain segments of the public was to see exactly what the monster was. I won’t spoil it or describe it, but I will say if that’s all you’re going to see, you’re missing the point. The point of a movie like this isn’t the monster or the creature, it’s the characters and what happens to them because of the monster that matters. You see the creature in the movie, and I personally think that it works in the context of the movie. Nothing more, nothing less, but I enjoyed it.
As for my comments on why I think the movie has some importance, here you are. The movie was shot on the cheap (for Hollywood standards) at a sum of $30 million. Yet, the movie looks much better than some shot for much more. When you take into account that it’s a genre movie, that it doesn’t look like an original Sci-Fi made for television movie, that makes it even more impressive. Filled with a cast of no name actors, and shot totally different, it tries to be at the very least, different. With all this, the movie has quite a bit going against it, yet still stands to make a pretty sizable amount of money. Hopefully, Hollywood might learn something from all this; and instead of giving cookie-cooker plots, filled with big names who make too much money, and making a gazillion sequels; instead make some better movies. Like Cloverfield.
Topics: Movies |
Tags: Cloverfield | review.
January 20th, 2008 at 10:46 am
‘Member how I told you that Marlena looked familiar, well she is, she was in Means Girls. In fact, none of the actors are no-names. If you check out there bios, which you can do here http://imdb.com/title/tt1060277/
you’ll find that all of them have quite a few films and TV shows under their belt. My personal favorite and perhaps the least known of the actors is the chick that plays Beth, her more notable roles are that of kissing couple and Reefer Girl.
February 2nd, 2008 at 7:34 pm
[…] looking at a review of Cloverfield, the reviewer brought up the fact that AMC theaters had a warning sign about people with motion […]