Cloverfield: Review By slysnide

May 18th, 2008 by slysnide
"I wanted New York to have it's own monster, like Japan's got Godzilla."
  • OVERALL
    3.0
    WORTHY
  • Story
  • Acting
  • Directing
  • Visuals
I'm kinda in between on this one. The camcorder thing is new for the genre, and helps restrict the visibility of the surroundings, making things more potential to jump out at you in the dark, though that doesn't happen. The ending with the cameraman under the monster wasn't even in the script, and was added at the last second. I think it would've done better w/out that bit scene, and the ending was expected, though anti-climactic. Enjoyable and funny. But the first 20 minutes or so are pointless. You don't even need to know the characters to feel for them when the mayhem begins. And it's not like anyone remembers or cares about their back-stories after said mayhem begins.

The story is simple and nothing new. The acting's alright. The restriction of visuals is good for the story being told.

As for the overall quote: In an interview with the director, he stated that very thing I put in the overall quote, and I thought to myself: "Well, if I'm not mistaken (which I'm not) then there was this little '33 film called, oh what was it? Oh yeah yeah: KING KONG that glorifies New York as having it's own beast, and there were 2! Count 'em, 2! remakes w/in a century that made big bucks. So this director is out there!!!!

Do you like this review?

Comments (3)

  1. IndyJones

    I liked it becuase of originality. And Abrams did say that King Kong was kinda our monster but not really. I dont think that Americans can grasp that concept like Japan does. Its a cultural thing, just like we cant have japanese ghost movies made here becuase its not the same thing. But I found the back stories of the characters vital just becuase it does make you feel for them when one of them dies or gets hurt. Interesting and Intense movie, good review

    5 years agoby @indyjonesFlag

  2. slysnide

    That sounds about right. Most of the movie was good, and there were a few inaccuracies, but the run time was still considerably short, and would've been even shorter w/out the 20 minutes of bogus crap data. But at least the journey was realistic, in that they didn't make anything unbelievably epic occur on their way to rescue Beth.

    5 years agoby @slysnideFlag

  3. Phatlightning

    yea, i was indifferent on this movie. And i'm sure the reason they added the scene at the last minute as well as keep the 20 minutes of bullsh*t in the beginning is because the movie was TOO SHORT. After all of that it was still only 80 minutes which is barely a movie by anyones regards which leads me to believe that most of what we saw was probably just "filler"

    5 years agoby @sxers2k1Flag