Cloverfield
- Tim Berroth
- Jan 25, 2008
- Series: Film
Thanks to a savvy marketing campaign that began six months ago, Cloverfield arrives in theatres to no small amount of buzz and anticipation. Shot on a shoestring budget with a relatively unknown cast, Cloverfield is cut straight from the mold of those campy Japanese Godzilla films of the sixties and seventies. Seasoned with a splash of modern sensibilities that give the film a more contemporary feel, it is missing one key ingredient: fun.
The film opens from the perspective of a recovered videotape with an eerie reference to an "area formerly known as Central Park." The tape begins with the date April 27 and the frivolous recordings of a pair of twenty-somethings, Rob and Beth. The exploits of young love are captured as they roam the streets of the Big Apple-a documentation of new romance starting to bloom, a sort of visual diary for the You Tube generation.
Quick jump to May 22 and a surprise going away bash for Rob (Michael Stahl-David), who is leaving for a job in Japan. As part of documenting the occasion, the video camera is placed in the hands of good friend Hud (T.J. Miller) who attacks his newfound responsibilities with the determination of a warrior. Even in the midst of chaos and the world literally falling apart around them, Hud never neglects his duty.
Since their earlier fling, Rob and Beth had gone separate ways. When Beth shows up at his going away party with another guy, it is an ominous reminder of how little we can control the daily minutiae of our lives. A fact that is only confirmed a hundredfold when the party is interrupted by a giant creature who chose this night to attack the city. Of course, good old Hud is there to make sure it is all caught on video.
The initial scenes of the attack are the most intense of the film. Eerily reminiscent of 9/11, these scenes are harrowing in their realism. The idea of an unknown force attacking New York City resonates within us all-the wounds are too fresh in our memory. In the context of this film, it seems highly inappropriate and insensitive, bordering on manipulation. When the source of the attack is finally revealed as a giant creature it is almost a relief to know and see the enemy. Too bad the monster looks like a combination of an albino bat and a plucked turkey.
With its choppy and jumpy camera work, Cloverfield tries so hard to be edgy that it forgets what these types of movies should be about: having fun. It takes itself so seriously that when the film slips into banality it is unforgivable. Are we really to believe that Hud held onto that camera and kept shooting during times of unbearable fear and tension? Would Rob really venture all the way back into the city and toward the monster to "rescue" his ex-girlfriend? Is it likely his friends would blindly follow him and risk their own lives just so he can get his girl back? Can one really survive being impaled on rebar through the chest?
Cloverfield does raise some interesting thoughts about our culture: the impact of new media outlets and how information is gathered and shared. Hud's video camera is a witness to history and the footage captured it all in real time. What Cloverfield reveals about human nature is the scariest thing of all: the city is under attack from an unknown monster, the military has stepped in and taken control of the fight, Rob's own brother and many of his friends have been killed before his eyes, thousands if not tens of thousands of people are surely dying in the streets and all Rob can think about is rescuing a girl with whom he had a fling with a few months ago.
Hearts may swoon and think that is romantic-I think it is scary, downright terrifying. Proves that the human heart is deceitfully wicked beyond all things-a thought even more frightening than a giant monster on the loose.
3 Comments | Login to Post Comments
Steven Adams on Jan 25, 2008 7:25am
Good to see a review of this movie. My wife and I saw it while away on a trip for the weekend to a city we had never been to before. I know my wife was really bothered by the shaky cinematography while I on the other hand adjusted to it after a few minutes.
I thought the "love story" part of the movie was weak & shallow. When it was first introduced that Rob was going back into the city after Beth, I leaned over to my wife and said, "why would he be going after her or act so in love, after what seemed to be a short fling?.." That part of the movie was completely unnecessary if you ask me. Why not have Rob going back in after his wife of many years?... Or his sister, brother, best friend?...
I am the type of person that does not get scared at horror, monster, or alien movies... But I must say at the end, I was very disturbed. As I said, we were seeing the movie in a city we had never been in before... I think part of the reason it may leave us feeling a bit disturbed,.. as viewers, we never got a break... a time to rest, or relax, and the fact the movie moved at such a fast pace.
All in all, after some thought, I think it was a pretty good movie...
BTW - Did you stay in the theater until the very end? Their was a message...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBHjgej9jp8
Frank Recinos on Jan 26, 2008 11:22am
I have to agree, the camera is also miraculously able to record for a whole night without recharging. But, in the end, this is a slice of life story. Much like "Once" but with more danger. I have to admit though, if you just lost a lot of peolpe in your life, wouldn't you fight to save at least one of them? I somewhat explore this in my blog at
letmypeopleread.blogspot.com Feel free to visit.
Richard S on Jan 28, 2008 1:17pm
The reason I am not planning on seeing this film is that when I first heard of it, "Cloverfield" was supposed to be a code name. It is the name of a street near where J.J. Abrams lives--or something like that. I kept expecting it would eventually get a real name, but it never did. If the film makers couldn't be bothered to come up with a clever name, I can't help but wonder how lazy they were with other details.