
Mixed reviews on this one. The New York Times hated it, whereas Entertainment Weekly gave it a B+.
My visceral reaction? I was scared. Really scared. Even after the movie I was still kinda shaky. Everyone laughed at the ending though, and generally had kind of a “What the hell? That’s it?” attitude. Because the theater lights didn’t come on right away, a bunch of people stayed behind to see if there’d be more after the credits. I don’t think there was (they were so long, I didn’t want to wait). So, on an entertainment level, very good. Really scary. A little predictable (I’m a whiz at this foreshadowing thing now) but very good.
The shaky cam took some getting used to, but the opening party scene (lasts around twenty minutes?) helped get me used to it, to the point that maybe you did kinda feel like you were there.
I’ve been sort of following the huge viral marketing campaign, which is why I saw this movie on opening day, and I guessed right – you don’t need to have followed any of it to get this movie, and if you have followed it, don’t expect any answers (except to questions concerning what the monster looks like – the camera loves him). All in all, I think the viral marketing is more interesting than the movie.
Now to the substance of the movie. EW seems to think it was blissful in its critique of its selfish, gorgeous characters – each forgettable (except Marlena, at least for me). The NYT believes the movie lacks “Freudian complexity or political critique,” comparing it to the classic Alien. I might have bought EW’s perception if the movie hadn’t seemed to be trying so hard to make me care about the characters, what with their love stories, and hadn’t so willingly thrown eye candy at the viewer. Because of how two-dimensional they are, they should be forgettable, but their love stories keep them from representing just regular New Yorkers trying to survive, a situation I would have preferred (i.e. if they’d been at ground zero of the monster attack – Midtown – and they’d just been concerned with getting out of the city alive, not going back for someone). Thus by the end of the movie, you can’t sympathize with them as everymen, and you haven’t managed to care enough about them as individuals to not laugh at the ending.
I also agree with the NYT that the movie even fails to capitalize on the fact that the cameraman seems overly concerned with documenting events, to the point that he risks his life several times – although if you think about it, the movie is memorable in that these characters, stuck in a potentially fatal situation, become immortal because of the cameraman.
However, I agree with Josh Bell at Las Vegas Weekly, who wrote, “At times Cloverfield seems less like a movie than a theme-park motion simulator, but that’s not a complaint; like those rides, it puts you square in the middle of the action, only able to see what’s right in front of your face.” Even before the movie started, I was imagining myself on a ride.
This isn’t 28 Days Later, which had depth beyond the scares. But this does have scares, which is why I truly enjoyed this movie. I found myself covering my mouth and praying for characters to make it, at the beginning especially, and pretty much up until the last ten minutes, when I realized how the movie would end. Only afterward, when you wonder what this movie is about, do you start to see its flaws. Maybe it won’t have much replay value, I don’t know, but it’s fun the first time around.
The next part of my review is SPOILER-ific, so read on at your own peril.
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS START HERE
This movie could have been even more subversive, as EW calls it, if it had done away with the good-looking hero-type guy. It’s because of him that so many characters get killed. I would much have preferred a story that suddenly switched to being about Marlena and Hud, rather than about Robert and Beth, the stereotypical pretty ones (isn’t there something wrong with having so many anorexically pretty people?). Who CARES about Beth? With such insubstantial characters, I cared about the funny guy (Hud) and the girl played by the actress in Mean Girls (Marlena).
Also, the ending could have used a news reel running after it, to explain what the monster was (or could have followed what happened to the surviving character). Someone mentioned that it left the way open for a sequel, but frankly, I don’t need one. I just want to know what the hell the monster is, because I’m convinced that it’s a person that drank waaaaay too much Slusho – or it’s the monster that’s been creating/protecting Slusho’s secret ingredient at the bottom of the ocean – or it’s just something creepy down there that the Chuai oil drilling expedition woke up.
Funny thing is, I feel almost like I ended up too smart for this movie. So many people were merely speculating on what was happening in the trailer when the silhouette of a character is shown against a tent and she’s bloating up incredibly – and I KNEW she’d explode. I was like, DUH!
Edit 1/21/08: I just realized that the major plot failing of this movie is that characters put other things before survival. Another person would go for survival, and probably only think about heroism in terms of saving the people physically close to him or her (like, the person standing next to him/her), not someone way far away. Putting romance before survival, that’s where this movie failed.