Cloverfield
(This article was written by a new contributer to ‘The Consumer’s Corner,’ my friend Andy Gates.)
Finally some originality coming out of Hollywood! It’s been a few years since we’ve had a good ol’ monster movie to enjoy and thanks to J.J. Abrams (Alias, Lost) that longing has been filled and then some.
Cloverfield isn’t the same monster movie you’ve seen a dozen times, actually it’s far from it. The film is shot entirely on a hand held camera and is shown as a home movie. And because of this genius idea, we see all the emotions that go through the characters as they witness a true disaster.
Cloverfield starts out as a going away party for Rob (Michael Stahl-David) as his best friend Hud (T.J. Miller) films the good times for Rob so he’ll remember his friends while he’s in Japan. But good times quickly become life threatening when a mysterious monster attacks their home, New York City. Hud never puts the camera down because “People are gonna wanna know, you know, how it all went down.”
Almost the entire movie is shot from Hud’s point of view which does something very unique, it puts the audience inside the movie. Whatever the characters see, you will see and be enthralled. This also allows the viewer to feel what our heroes feel which is true terror. You will be side by side with Rob, Hud and their friends as they go through the Big Apple trying to avoid mayhem, injury and death.
Many critics have compared Cloverfield to the 1999 surprise hit The Blair Witch Project because of the cinematography styles. While the style is similar, that is the only thing these two films share. The main complaint of The Blair Witch Project was while the characters obviously saw some horrific sights, the audience didn’t see anything. That is not the case in Cloverfield. The viewer sees everything the characters see and that includes the gruesome monster. Unlike Blair Witch, Cloverfield is mentally and visually stunning.
Many monster movies have resorted to show a tender side of their “monster” such as King Kong and Godzilla. You won’t see any such humanity in the real monster of Cloverfield. This creature is truly horrifying and is here to destroy and kill. The only humanism we see is in the very well defined characters. Cloverfield is the first true “monster movie” since Ridley Scott’s 1979 classic Alien.
This movie puts you right in the threshold of danger and refuses to relent. It will have your nerves on end and your mind begging for more. This is what cinema was created for, originality, aestheticism, thrills and of the course the audience.
(WARNING: Because of the way Cloverfield is filmed it may cause motion sickness. Theatres have compared it to riding a rollercoaster so it may not be for everybody. I did get a slight headache during the experience, but it was well worth it.)
–Andy Gates
cloverfield, movies, horror, thriller
(Thank you to ‘Good News Film Reviews‘ for linking to this article.)
January 26th, 2008 at 8:37 am
The complaint I had with Blair Witch was the shaky camera. It didn’t add a thing in my opinion. Think I’ll skip this movie for the same reason.
January 26th, 2008 at 9:38 am
If the shaking bothered you in Blair Witch, I’d probably reccommend you sitting this one out. While the picture quality is much, much better (which makes sense because cameras have come a long way since ‘99) the shaking may be a little worse because these people are running for their lives throughout the movie and it’s impossible to hold a handheld camera still while running.
You said the shaking “didn’t add a thing.” Well you have to think about it. Why’d they do that? The reason is to disorientate the audience during an intense scene just like the characters are. It’s to put you more into the movie. The director wants you to feel what Rob and his friends are going through and the impact wouldn’t be as great with an over-the-shoulder camera.
January 27th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Is the camera shaking as bad as everyone says to the extent of inducing vomiting? You said it caused you a headache, but on a scale of 1 to 10, how painful would this be for the average plebeian moviegoer? I am not down with modern monster movies, but this one seems intriguing.
January 27th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
It’s true some people have gotten sick while watching this film, but those are people who are very prone to motion sickness. For instance, people who can’t handle long car rides because they get sick should not see this on the big screen. But if you can handle a roller coaster, you should be fine.
My headache really wasn’t that bad and the fact that I hadn’t eaten all day could have contributed to it. I am not one to get motion sickness at all and I love roller coasters so the more I think about it I tend to feel that the movie had no impact on my headache. My date had no symptoms at all and she can’t stand roller coasters. So I really don’t think the shaking is that bad. Is it noticeable? Yes, but after the first twenty minutes I doubt you’ll even notice it. The movie is definitely intriguing. It blew me away! There’s a reason it broke all January box office records.