Cloverfield

Great. The creators of Cloverfield exceeded my expectations. A journey around New York has never been so terrifying and intense. But back to the beginning. The introductions to the main characters was done really nicely and doesn’t seem too forced. Definitely the best of the team is Hud. The cameraman who (it seems) had never held a camera in his hands before shows the most important things, adding a suitable commentary to the picture and is really intent on filming this documentary from life. I don’t think I have ever felt such an affinity with a character as I did with Hud. The rest of the cast is fine too, but I won’t go into it too much, to let Hud shine through. ;) And now to the most important thing. The monster seems like it’s crawled out of one of those dark fantasies by H. P. Lovecraft. It really is horrible (Godzilla was pretty in comparison), has no name (in fact we don’t know if it’s a him or a her) and what it does is a dream come true for monster movie fans. He appears suddenly, unexpectedly and at the most apt moments. He demolishes bridges, tramples tanks and still keeps something up his sleeve for the finale. And have I saw that he’s really horrible yet? And that he has big, spikey teeth? And his repulsive followers are almost the same, always turning up at the least appropriate moments (absolute darkness, dark places behind doors etc.). And the hand-held camera is great, draws you into the action and I personally have nothing against it. Quite the opposite. Congratulations, Abrams, congratulations, Reeves. And those readers who haven’t seen Cloverfield yet... GET ON DOWN TO THE MOVIE THEATER! Believe me, this is movie that you just have to see on the big screen. (01/02/2008)

After watching it a second time several years later, I'm raising my rating because I appreciate above all the fantastic demonstration of the implementation possibilities. Goddard politely circles around genre clichés but manages to profile the protagonists, and Reeves takes the whole thing to a new level with a clever POV, showing only as much of the titular monster as the audience needs, though we’re certainly begging for more. Fantastic special effects and a perfect soundtrack move the film into top form. At a time when polished CGI is the standard, the flying head, the iconic bridge, and the leaning building look like a technical treat from a time yet to come. 4 ½. (07/04/2016)

It is a blast, but sometimes the excessive effort to push for authenticity at all costs can be bothersome. After all, there are simply moments when even the toughest journalist, reporter or cameraman wouldn’t be able hold the camera and would run to save their own life. So besides the fact that director, Matt Reeves, basically shouts to the world “look how realistically I filmed this” thanks to these scenes, the film does not suffer from any significant shortcomings. The characters behave quite believably, the chaos and confusion are excellently portrayed, and the sense of unpredictability is brilliant. Only the clichéd subplots of the story (except for the rampage of the monster and the rescue of the loved one – as later revealed) get a bit boring, but among all the explosions, shooting, and falling buildings, there is not much time for it anyway. (23/06/2008)

"I'm documenting." I am devastated that Cloverfield is just an average picture. It was a really nice idea (despite being pipped to the post by that Spanish zombie movie - Rec - that I’m intrigued to see). That goes hand in hand with the convincing stylization. I’m not exaggerating when I say that the sound is just perfect. The music composition during the closing credits was just delicious. And lastly the entire movie up to the storming by the army was absolutely gripping. Unfortunately, the creators then ran out of ideas, just recycling those already used, all of a sudden the chosen style no longer has anything to offer and primarily the characters’ reaches the pinnacle of illogicality and starts to be actively annoying. If this were just another classic Godzilla movie, that wouldn’t matter at all, but pseudo-documentaries trying to be “what would happen if" realistic, this is really surprising and ruins the entire concept. And the last five minutes really puts the icing on the cake. Why couldn’t it have finished with that fall? This way, although it has a clean running time of about seventy five minutes, in the end even that is too long. And it’s a huge shame. (27/01/2008)

Or How to effectively combine a classic monster movie with the modern tradition of found footage horror. It's no wonder that Reeves and Goddard are building such promising Hollywood careers thanks to this. Cloverfield is a superbly constructed recreation of a nightmare, focusing on the immediate circle of a group of hapless heroes. The story unfolds rhythmically in regularly changing locations, cleverly subverting the audience's expectations just by cramming into the foreground more genre tropes than the viewer would expect from a film with a giant monster devastating New York. I will probably need a second screening for maximum satisfaction, when the originality and narrative certainty will surely affect me even more strongly. EDIT: The second screening induced maximum satisfaction. 90% (07/08/2018)