2008 Woodie Awards
Movie Reivew: 'Cloverfield'
Like the 'Blair Witch Project,' only with an actual plot and budget
Dale Maxfield
Issue date: 1/24/08 Section: Features
The early months of any new year basically guarantee that the major studios will throw their left over muck from 2007 into the theaters for poor audiences to endure.
The three movies that I've seen so far this year all have received one star ("First Sunday," "In the Name of the King," "One Missed Call").
It's in desperate times like these that we should all raise our arms in the air and wail, "Thank God for 'Cloverfield.'"
The plot is quite simple. During a surprise party held for Rob Hawkins (Michael Stahl-David), a tremor is felt similar to an earthquake. The partygoers soon find out that an earthquake did not take place; instead, a Godzilla-like monster is attacking New York City.
This is realized once the head of the Statue of Liberty comes flying by the crowd. Rob and his friends then go to find Beth, (Odette Yustman), Rob's love interest, in the heart of Manhattan.
While Cloverfield (directed by Matt Reeves) is no masterpiece, it still has plenty of fantastic qualities. The movie is shot entirely from handheld cameras. It would be fair to call this "The Blair Witch Project" with an actual plot and budget.
There were plenty of scares and thrills in the film. While many of these "jump scares" seem too obvious for conventional methods, the first person camera view gets the audience more engaged. Be warned: You will get nauseous.
The wonderful cinematography of Cloverfield is not its only highlight, however. Michael Stahl-David gives a surprisingly good performance for a movie with this sort of plotline. This, however, will be unfortunately overlooked in the long run because the real stars of this movie are its technical aspects. That said, Stahl-David's performance is noteworthy.
The movie does have its shortcomings, however. The character of Hud Platt (T.J. Miller) was supposed to provide some comic relief. Instead, he comes across as rather annoying and unrealistic. There were also some minor plot points I had qualms with. The characters have tendencies to make rather ridiculous decisions. One of the worst errors a screenwriter can make is when he makes the audience say "Yeah, right." That happens on a few occasions throughout the movie, but the good moments definitely outweigh the bad ones.
Cloverfield is a wonderful example of a film that takes a simple idea and goes a long way with it. The handheld camera works so well that it arguably carries the movie. However, if this becomes the new trend, I would be highly upset. Cloverfield is fun for the same reason that 3-D films are fun. They are novelties, and as stylistic as they may be, they are more fun because they are not the norm. If this filmmaking method becomes too frequent, Cloverfield will lose the magic that makes it entertaining in the first place.
The three movies that I've seen so far this year all have received one star ("First Sunday," "In the Name of the King," "One Missed Call").
It's in desperate times like these that we should all raise our arms in the air and wail, "Thank God for 'Cloverfield.'"
The plot is quite simple. During a surprise party held for Rob Hawkins (Michael Stahl-David), a tremor is felt similar to an earthquake. The partygoers soon find out that an earthquake did not take place; instead, a Godzilla-like monster is attacking New York City.
This is realized once the head of the Statue of Liberty comes flying by the crowd. Rob and his friends then go to find Beth, (Odette Yustman), Rob's love interest, in the heart of Manhattan.
While Cloverfield (directed by Matt Reeves) is no masterpiece, it still has plenty of fantastic qualities. The movie is shot entirely from handheld cameras. It would be fair to call this "The Blair Witch Project" with an actual plot and budget.
There were plenty of scares and thrills in the film. While many of these "jump scares" seem too obvious for conventional methods, the first person camera view gets the audience more engaged. Be warned: You will get nauseous.
The wonderful cinematography of Cloverfield is not its only highlight, however. Michael Stahl-David gives a surprisingly good performance for a movie with this sort of plotline. This, however, will be unfortunately overlooked in the long run because the real stars of this movie are its technical aspects. That said, Stahl-David's performance is noteworthy.
The movie does have its shortcomings, however. The character of Hud Platt (T.J. Miller) was supposed to provide some comic relief. Instead, he comes across as rather annoying and unrealistic. There were also some minor plot points I had qualms with. The characters have tendencies to make rather ridiculous decisions. One of the worst errors a screenwriter can make is when he makes the audience say "Yeah, right." That happens on a few occasions throughout the movie, but the good moments definitely outweigh the bad ones.
Cloverfield is a wonderful example of a film that takes a simple idea and goes a long way with it. The handheld camera works so well that it arguably carries the movie. However, if this becomes the new trend, I would be highly upset. Cloverfield is fun for the same reason that 3-D films are fun. They are novelties, and as stylistic as they may be, they are more fun because they are not the norm. If this filmmaking method becomes too frequent, Cloverfield will lose the magic that makes it entertaining in the first place.
Be the first to comment on this story