Saturday, April 28, 2012

Movie Reviewed: Cloverfield

With the sole exception Alcatraz, I have yet to be disappointed by JJ Abrams. So, I just watched Abrams's 2008, somewhat low-budget horror/action flick Cloverfield, and that means it's time to inflict my opinions about it on the internet.

In A Nutshell: Cloverfield follows a group of New Yorkers who must flee for their lives after a giant, Godzilla-esque monster of unknown origins begins terrorizing and destroying Manhattan and and struggle to survive as the military launches a full on war against it. Oh, and it's recovered footage. Now, my opinions on that sub-genre vary (Apollo 18 almost ruined it for me, Chronicle sort salvaged it) but it was done pretty well, and I think it wouldn't have been as good in 3rd person.

The Good: The overall story was really good. They take the time to make you actually care about the characters before people start dying. Most of the plot is generated by the monster wreaking havoc and destruction, and damn entertaining havoc and destruction it was. I mean who didn't love seeing the Statue of Liberty getting decapitated? It was full of suspense, too, which, coupled with all the chaos, made it genuinely freaky. All the actors did a good job with what they were given, and the characters were pretty believable, and, unlike a lot of horror movies, someone bothers to crack a joke every once and awhile. I was also happy they never actually explain what the monster is or where it came from, instead just naming of a bunch of possible origins. Plus, you never see the entire monster at once, and you only see the monster's face twice, and one of the times it was only for about three seconds, which makes it pretty eerie. And the ending, while predictable, was more than a little bit chilling.

The Bad: Now, this is my beef with most recovered footage movies: there were some moments where it just didn't make sense that the guy kept holding the camera. I mean, when your running from a giant monster and the lethal mini-monsters that jump off of it's back while the military fires missiles at it, most people wouldn't still be holding a camera, they'd drop it and run for there life. Now, it's easy enough to get past that, and if you can (I did) then then you should enjoy the movie. It's also a kinda low-budget, but that's to be expected from recovered footage. The only other thing is the length. The movie is 84 minutes long. If you paid to see this movie (I didn't) then you might feel a bit ripped off, just because you spent money to basically watch something that wasn't even an hour and half. Once again, it's not hard to get past that, and if you can, then the movie's easy to enjoy.

Am I on board with this? Yes. Is it the best thing JJ Abrams has ever done? No, but it's not the worst thing he's done either (cough cough, Alcatraz.) Is it my favorite horror movie? No, that's still either Donnie Darko or Alien. But is it good and entertaining as horror movies go? Absolutely.

Final Rating: 87%


Be sure to comment, subscribe, and check out my other posts!

2 comments:

  1. i thought this film was ok i hate films like this with shaking cam i would give it 72%

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. but is was so good...
      also check out my whedonverse episodes post...
      or any of my other posts...

      Delete

Say what you like, just no profanity or personal attacks