Pajiba

Excellent review! But:

like when the grizzly but well-meaning black commander

I'm pretty sure you meant "grizzled".

Can't.Fucking.Wait.

Thanks Dan.

I just got back from seeing it. Everything during the movie felt so real that coming out I was still under the emotional perception that there were "monsters" everywhere. I really don't know how I made it home safely, being so paranoid I was going to be attacked. I think this just lends itself to how awesome this movie is. Maybe it is the same old tired monster movie devices up until the final cut but, damn, if they don't scare the shit out like they originally did.

Seriously - best monster movie in years. And the fact that nothing gets answered as to where the beast came from (unless you have been playing along on the web), that just makes it even better.

The part that bugged me- after prying open the vending machine below the subway, why for FUCK SAKE does he not take the crowbar with him, when returning above ground? ARRRRRGGGGGHHH!!!! He could have wasted those little fuckers. Other than that, a 6 out of 10.

J.J. Abrams gets my vote, any day. As it turns out, there's more than just nameless brilliance behind the mind of Alias, Lost and now, Cloverfield -- it's called "The Mystery Box."

Check out Abrams' lecture/speech on http://www.ted.com, Pajiba!

I'm so excited to see this movie!! It's good to know that it doesn't get bogged down in it's own monster mythology.

People, people!

I started reading the comments but stopped, please, at least during the opening weekend, do not be afraid to use a big ol' SPOILER WARNING for those of us that haven't made it to the multiples yet...

[Clapping and jumping]

Yip! Yip! Hooray!

Thanks Dan. Fine review ya got there.

This will most definitely be the next Date Night for Mr. Pink and I.

Also good to hear that it doesn't waste a bunch of time getting into any explanation of the monster. Just a lot of BOOM and SMASH.

I still cannot give these filmmakers that much credit: the whole point is that the characters are wooden and so are their performances and the plot's believability is meant to be warped? These people aren't trying to play with verisimilitude...this isn't the underground film society at college here.

As the almighty GOB would put it - "C'mon!"

This has to be a first on Pajiba for me. I disagree with a positive review of a genre film. At least the conclusion of it, that is.

Yes, it's very well made. The acting is very natural (save one "Look at me acting" moment that's blink and you'll miss it) and I thought the screenplay was very strong. By that I mean, the story - while very derivative and not making all that much sense - is well structured, the dialogue seems natural, and the locations and effects are very well planned.

But I was so put off by the 9/11 references that I was thrown out of the film once the action took to the streets. I get life imitating art imitating life. Done well, it can be an amazing thing to watch (for example, and it's a poor example for most, I think Gus Van Sant's Elephant is a phenomenal film because he was willing to tackle such an awful event on screen); done poorly (which I think is the case here), it comes across as overly manipulative and disgusting.

The monster and effects were totally badass, though, and the shaky-camera didn't even make me sick like The Blair Witch Project. Still doesn't mean I like the film. The further away I was pushed by 9/11 references, the more I noticed problems like unlikable characters and deus-ex-machinas all over the place.

If you go in thinking it's a mindless monster movie, you'll be endlessly confused. If you go in looking for more, you might wind up being completely turned off. Cloverfield's going to be really hit or miss.

I have been anticipating this movie for so long, and was worried that it would be a huge let down. Much to my surprise, it turns out to be an amazing flick. I absolutely loved the film!

My only wish is that we had been fed more for the ending, instead of leaving everything to the speculative imagination, like a mid season episode of Lost. Darn you J.J.! :-)

I want a sequel, ASAP!

Thank God! The husband and I wen to see it today and loved it, but all the reviews I've been reading were 9/11 blah blah 9/11 BLAH! I was starting to think I'd maybe seen a different movie. It was totally awesome, though--I'd see it again in a heartbeat.

I went into this knowing almost nothing about the film and I was really impressed. It's everything Blair Witch wanted to be.

Also, the date on the camera? It's a feature you can turn on or off. Is it really so much of a stretch that someone would have flipped the switch at some point in the weeks between filming?

"...has created maybe the most interesting monster movie since Alien, and one that focuses as much on the emotions of the characters as the action sequences."

And that's where I disagree-

1.the monster was best when shown in brief glimpses-only in parts,but when revealed in its entirety,it was nothing special.

2.emotions?EMOTIONS?the "love" story was too cheesy and male lead a HACK of an actor.

I felt that it was a merely DECENT movie (with respectable objectives),but could've been better if not for the overemphasis on the sappy little story mr director was so bent on turning into something profound.I remember two,possibly 3 scenes from the whole experience,otherwise completely forgettable.

I should clarify--it's not that I didn't see the 9/11 parallels--they were there, obviously. But at the same time most reviewers were acting like this was some sort of Flight 93 starring The Rock or something. I thought they used current imagery to capture the feeling of terror, without turning it into a terrorist shout out.

...oh please not another movie in which the audience has to catch every fucking nuance.

Hi all -

I just got home to Brooklyn after seeing it in a movie theater literally 10 blocks from the building where the movie starts. I also happen to work in that building.

To anyone else who's seen this movie, they might understand what that entails in terms of me walking out of the theater and then have to walk through the streets of Manhattan to take the subway.

That was unbelievably surreal. It would be like watching the last half-hour of Titanic while on a large boat in the North Atlantic.

I think being a New Yorker adds a certain other weight to this movie. Having been here on 9/11 (has Rudy trademarked that yet?), it made certain scenes all the more harrowing.

I love your reviews Dan, but I was hoping that John (who I think lives in Brooklyn) would be reviewing this one and giving his NYer take on it.

(Also, the pick up point is 40th and Park. And I think you meant Columbus Circle not Square.)

Any other NYers here on this comment board that have seen the movie? What y'all think?

pretty much sums my thoughts on the film up exactly. its no revolution, its just a solid monster flick. also, bartap, the date on the camera inexplicably disappears between shots at the party, not between the april and may cut, so it makes sense to point it out. somebody still could have switched it off during the party, but most likely they just figured it would be too distracting for an entire film.

I saw the first show at my local theatre, and I was fairly blown away. Sure the POV camera is a gimmick, but a very effective one, as it throws the audience into the story, rather than letting them remain impartial observers, however engaged they might be in the events on screen.

'Cloverfield' is a cinéma vérité monster movie. I tip my hat to Reeves, Goddard and Abrams for having the balls to try it, and the skills to pull it off.

OK, I just reread my post and I might have made it sound like some really deep movie which it TOTALLY is not.

I agree with Dan that in terms of what it sets out to do, it does excellently but other than that, I'll forget all about it in a couple of days.

See now, I wasn't impressed. The 9/11 parallels weren't the issue...but the lame love story was. I know what it's like to be all in love in your 20's, and I could appreciate the funny parts at the party. But as the love story dragged on and on...I just didn't care. The effects were great, the idea somewhat unique, but the lead douche and his whining really put me off.

Sounds like Blairwitch, but looked more interesting in the previews. I dunno, I like movies with more substance than this, but cinematic catastrophes are always fun to watch...

I'd agree with this. Just make sure you don't sit in third row. I looked like Danielynn for about 24 hours after the trauma.

I'd agree with this. Just make sure you don't sit in the third row. I looked like Danielynn for about 24 hours after the trauma.

I'm agreeing again with Daniel, surely the end times are nigh. I loved the movie and it is pretty much spoiler-proof with a couple of exceptions. It is a nasty-ass giant monster movie told from the perspective of prospective road-kill and that's what makes it great.

Eh, I don't know. I've been kinda meh about this film, but Daniel's review makes me think I should see it anyway. What to do, what to do?

I just got back from seeing it and I don't think I've ever said OH SHIT or WHAT THE FUCK out loud in a movie theater as much as I did during this movie.

I just got back from seeing it and I don't think I've ever said OH SHIT or WHAT THE FUCK out loud in a movie theater as much as I did during this movie.

I am definitely looking forward to seeing this on Sunday. Been waiting for months.

In related news, it looks like one of our favored Pajibans, Dustin Rowles, rough day will continue. First, there was the whole Skank Cancer backlash going on in the 27 Dresses commentary and now his Pajiba Crash privileges have just been revoked...

If you recall Dustin made this bold statement a few months back on this very site: "Mark my words -- if Cloverfield gets higher than 50 percent on the tomatometer, I solemnly swear never to mention Crash on this site again."

(see: http: // www. pajiba. com/ pajiba-the-13th.htm)

Cloverfield currently has a quite ripe 78 percent on the ole tomatometer.

Bitchiness can be a cruel and fickle mistress indeed...

It's too bad because [i]Crash[/i] totally sucks and deserved everything it got.

Ooh, I forgot about that. Thing is, in a weird way, Heigl-hate distracted him from his usual ranting on Haggis. Next week is going to be goooood.

Best monster movie in years, in my opinion. The design of the creature was a bit weak for my tastes but it wasn't even about what it looked like.

What bothered me was

when marlena was bitten, and she started bleeding they were like BITE! BITE! I kinda wanted to see more about those bites, but that part, to me, was the craziest and most affecting scene.

They didn't show the bite effects because of not wanting to get an R rating. The scene was still awesome, even without huge amounts of gore.

If anyone wants to see original and moving camera work, go see The Diving Bell and the Butterfly.

But I saw it, and I've got some money left over, I suppose I'll catch Cloverfield. I do loves me some J.J. (the jet plane).

(Not quite spoilers, but just in case...)

We just got back from the theater and, like Siddharta, I found myself looking at the bridge I cross to get home and feeling like there were monsters. There were plenty of flaws and cliches in the movie, but you know what? I felt like I was running with the characters, my heart pounding and my hands shaking. I knit at the movies, and at times I couldn't even make a stitch. This is a big thing for me. Usually I can distance myself from what's happening on the screen but the POV and the hope that they'll...just...barely...make it...seriously drew me right in.

This was a fun, very scary, and heart-stopping movie. I will, however, be staying up very late tonight, as I think some of the images will stay with me for a while.

I saw this last night. I loved it and really enjoyed its gimick. It wasn't earth shattering by any means, but it was still fun.
My only gripe is that I'm an information junky (and also lazy) so i would have liked to have seen more explanation within the movie itself, as who can be bothered trawling the intarwebs these days?

I saw this last night. I loved it and really enjoyed its gimick. It wasn't earth shattering by any means, but it was still fun.
My only gripe is that I'm an information junky (and also lazy) so i would have liked to have seen more explanation within the movie itself, as who can be bothered trawling the intarwebs these days?

For the life of me, I will never understand so many people willing to jam Abrams's cock into their mouths. The shit stain can't tell a coherent story, and he never has any fucking idea where the ending is.

This review had some criticisms, but the favorable bits read like apologies for Abrams's shitty story telling and the bad acting of the department store mannequins he cast. For fuck's sake, why do so many people like the taste of J.J.'s cock?

"We just got back from the theater and, like Siddharta, I found myself looking at the bridge I cross to get home and feeling like there were monsters"

I am going to call this as the first instance of a Siddharta reference on Pajiba. Kind of random that it is in the Cloverfield thread, but whatever.
Also, what is with all the double posts? Only hit that button once people!

Did we all see the same movie ... it was a steaming pile of shite! Blair Witch meets Godzilla? Cause you know when ever I am running for my life, the most important thing is to hold the camera up 'so people can see what it was like'.

They took what could have been a great movie and turned it into a chase movie with characters that we did not really care all that much for.

I can not in good faith recommend this movie to anyone.

I guess you guys don't hear this every day, but let's say it: this was an excellent review, and, just because of that, I actually think I won't be catching this one.

The description is so accurate (both on this and on another site I've just read, which surprisingly didn't like it after saying pretty much the same), I feel it's not for me. And still, I get to thank you for the text.

But no "so bad, it works" for me, thanks. I know it's not exactly the case, but let's face it: a disparaging amount of clichés, a monster that barely reveals itself, interchangeable pretty young people... I mean, come on...

I saw the midnight showing on Thursday, so the theater was packed with the most rabid fans. As the credits rolled, there was total silence. It was like we were all trying to figure out if we liked it or not. I did love the monster and was amazed by the realism of the destruction and chaos. It's definitely a movie that needs to be seen on the big screen; my only gripe was how annoying the main characters were (except for Hud, who was funny and sweet).

I absolutely hated Rob and Beth in the beginning of the film, they are so cutesy I wanted to gag. All the characters appeared to be trust fund babies; the women were WAY too good-looking in their designer dresses and acting sophisticated beyond their years. Peach-fuzz face Rob moving to Japan to become a vice-president. Yeah, right.

I went with my 20-something son and his friend, and was somewhat encouraged that the woman they found most attractive was Lizzy Caplan. All of us got motion sickness from the camera work.

SPOILER ALERT:
Was anyone else annoyed that Rob was able to open up a new cell phone battery, put it in his phone, and have it work immediately without being charged? Also, the movie should have ended after the helicopter scene. Having it continue beyond that was just ridiculous.

Just got home from seeing this flick. I think the end of the first paragraph was the best way to sum up this movie. It wasn't great, but it was good. The POV gimmick got me. I hate to admit it, but it did. I enjoyed running through the streets with the scared masses. Although, very predictable I enjoyed it. I want that camera, it was disaster proof!
Oh, wait....did anyone else who saw this see the thing drop into the water at the very end (the Coney Island shot) of the movie?? If you go see it at the end look to the right of the middle of the screen.
Happy Movie-ing

This movie was exactly what I thought it was going to be, and it worked perfectly, for what it was. That's not a veiled compliment. So many films, so many genre and monster movies strive to be something and fail miserably. But this was an impeccable exercise in craft, all while staying mostly within the limitations of the form. For example (spoiler)

as the movie progresses, the camera gets further and further away from the monster, in wider shots (down the street, on top of buildings, in a helicopter) and we can really see the fucker based on where Hud is in the action. the last scene it's outdoors, in the daytime, and we get a good look at the fucker. A great simple way to reveal it.

Walking home in New York was a harrowing and paranoid experience. I kept on expecting to see monsters, or those tiny bugs, jumping out of every corner. Right now as I sit at home I hear sirens out the window and am wondering if the end has come for us all.

As someone who was in Manhattan on 9/11, it was incredibly evocative of that day - the constant reports, not knowing anything, trying to get in touch with family members, cell phones not working, evacuating on bridges.

I'm glad that films today are using the real terror that we experienced to make truly terrifying horror films. Sure, the monster was big and ugly, the bugs gross, and the action was great - but by putting it in one point of view, and basically making the movie about the LIMITS of one point of view, the filmmakers make a movie that commented on the limits of the YouTube generation.

also : the actresses name is Jessica Lucas. She played Lilly Ford. you should fix that.

We had to leave the movie right after the hipster girl...um...you know...because the camera work made us so sick...I've never had that happen before. I thought I was going to vomit violently. Don't sit up front when you see this movie.

*Spoilers...but not more then previous*
As a spoil sport who went in looking for this stuff. Yes, ocean splash. Yes, he says "Its still alive" after the credits.....
I liked it but have no clue where a sequel could go...

I was going to emphatically refuse to see this sheerly out of annoyance at the 'viral' ad campaign from hell. But damnit, it actually sounds like a good time that won't make me heckle the screen. I'm up for some crashy-bangy monsters now.

Hud had the funny lines in the movies??? what funny lines? he was annoying and unfunny and ugly which was his only good point that he held the camera so i didn't have to look at his ugly mug for 90 minutes... good movie but hud being funny come'on his jokes were lame and generic

I saw this movie this morning at the Lincoln Center theater, about 5 blocks north of Columbus Circle (not Square). I want to not like the movie, but I do. Yeah, the shaky cam pissed me off and made me throw up. Yeah, the characters were annoyingly wooden. Yes, 20somethings don't live in lofts like that in SoHo. No, you can't get from Columbus Circle to Grand Central in 5 minutes. Nor can you get from Spring street to 59th in the same amount of time. And for fuck's sake, if that kid can afford that apartment, why can't he afford a digital camcorder? (although, that one sure can take a beating)

Yet, for all of that. . . I liked it.

Fantastic review. I saw this at a matinée today, and was absolutely floored by how good it was. I recognized the cliches (She doesn't know how much I love her!) and the sometimes-unbelievability of the plot, but was able to forget all that because the end result of the film was so incredibly successful. In other words, I enjoyed the fuck out of this film, and will happily watch it again and again. Also, the part in the tunnels scared the shit out of me. Oh, and my sister once hooked up with the guy who played Hud, and he's apparently a huge douche. :)

Also, I'm not from NY, but I'm in Chicago, and went into the city 10 min after seeing the film. Very unnerving to be around skyscrapers and huge groups of people after seeing this :)

All I want to know is how was the Star Trek XI Trailer????

Not one mention of it?

I'm disappointed in my fellow Pajibers for not sharing!

I'm not only from NYC, but I worked 5 blocks from the WTC on 9/11 so I got to see most of the days events in person before I saw them on TV. The movie did an uncomfortably good job of capturing the panic, confusion and fear that ruled the streets that morning. In a theater full of NYers, we couldn't help be acutely aware of the parallels. I have to say though, despite my closeness with the events being alluded to, I didn't feel it was exploitive.

Yeah Drew Goddard for writing such an entertaining film. Besides Joss Whedon himself Goddard was the best writter on Buffy!

i got back from seeing this a few hours ago, and maybe it was my fault i went to see it hung over, but by the end of the film (due to the shaky camera footage) i thought i was going to absolutely yak everywhere. it was the most intense case of motion sickness ever.

actually, oddly enough, outside the theatre there was vomit spewed all over the garbage can. we didn't understand it while we were waiting in line...but it made complete sense afterwards.

that being said, i thought it was really very good. it was extremely entertaining, and at some points, a little too overwhelming. all in all, i'd say it was money well spent and that i pretty much agree with this review.

to whowhatwhere,

i was trembling with excitement when i saw the teaser trailer for the new star trek movie. it was definitely the highlight of the previews. i can't wait to see the longer theatrical trailer.

No Godzilla?

Just got back from a midnight showing (for my money, the best time to go catch something like this) and I gotta say, I was pleased.

I think the movie itself garnered way too much hype thanks to the trailer's presence with "Transformers" and the whole no-title gimmick that then spun into Internet games/Youtube analyses/geek overload. So much talk made it appear as if this was something greater than what it was or is: a simple monster movie.

But Cloverfield manages to be exciting and fun from the moment the explosions and roaring start. The cast was immaterial. They're pretty people designed to suffer and die for our pleasure -- and many of them do. Leaps of logic? Who cares?! Bring on the destruction and carnage!

BTW, I now have a crush on Lily and her deliciously-looking sweater puppies. Yum!

Went to the first showing of the movie at midnight on opening day and was pretty damn entertained. Watched at the Lincoln Square theater in Manhattan and have been to a lot of the places where the action takes place. That definitely made it more personal as I could have imagined me and my friends making a run for it too (Though without the cliche ridden dialogue).
The camera work was pretty nauseating so I was pretty thankful that it only lasted less than 90 minutes, which is a pretty good length as I don't know what else they could have done with it.
The monster design was pretty interesting but the terror of it was much greater than when it was fully revealed. Overall a pretty good movie for what it does, delivering thrills.

I think I like how you're giving the majority of the credit to Reeves and Goddard.

I saw it and was disappointed. It was EXACTLY like any other New York monster movie. (Godzilla anyone?) It was no more frightening than any other monster movie. It was predictable on every turn. Come on now...did you all NOT figure out that they were going to end up walking the dark subway tunnles only to be confronted with something? The camera work is going to make you motion sick. The effects of the buildings blowing up and being destroyed WAS really amazing. The love story in the movie was TERRIBLE. The only characters I found myself liking was Hud, who you never really see and Marlena (who dies because of the bite) The other three I could of cared less about. In fact, I found myself hoping Rob would be done away with before he ever found Beth. Its a cool premis, but it does NOT live up to the hype. This film is mediocre.

"Of course, having the date inexplicably there and then not there make zero sense within the story's universe..."

Not necessarily. Since they barely know how to work the camera, they could have turned off an "in-camera feature" in the course of the evening. The camera wouldn't have to be filming in order for Hud to have figured out how to turn it off at some point, would it?

I would think Hud would want the date on, though, but whatever. It's not something to worry too much about.

People who approach Cloverfield as "a story" (like poopadoop, above) will think everything is poorly written and that it's not particularly good. But they're missing the point; the real story is the one you're supposed to construct around the faux historical artifact that you're watching. You don't NEED to give a shit about Rob or Beth; they were just the ones caught on camera and boy does it suck to be them.

Cloverfield is smarter than it pretends to be, and it's very fun. I doubt I'll watch it more than one other time in my life -- on video, where the camerawork will be easier to deal with -- but I'm really glad that I saw it.

It's a very solid, enjoyable B-movie on the level of, say, Pitch Black.

I forgot to mention it earlier but the movie, with the jerky camera movements, felt like an amusement park ride. It's an intense experience, nothing more.

I am in the same position as an earlier commenter - for once, I disagree with a positive review. I thought this movie was awful. The gimmick is clever and different for sure, but after 20 minutes I just wanted them to hold still. I got seriously nauseous about 40 minutes in. On top of that, though, the story is boring (monster destroys city - giant who cares) and many points seemed tacked on. The "babies" were ridiculously contrived and derivative. I felt like I was watching the attack of the love child of the Alien creature and the Starship Troopers enemy. Plus, there's Abrams' hubris that permeates all of his projects. He seems to think he's cleverer than the audience and that he can introduce slivers of psuedo-mysteries (who are these things? did we create them? why do the babies make people's eyes bleed and stomachs explode?) and that we'll all be satisfied with his winking assurance that there's something more, something far awesomer than we can imagine behind it. But he never pays off. Any watcher of Lost can confirm this. He piles questions so high he can't find his way down to a single, satisfying answer.

Anyway, this isn't meant to be a rant about Abrams. On this movie specifically, I thought it was dreadful.

It's "could have" poopadoop. "could of" doesn't even make any fucking sense. Stop texting so much; it's making you dumber than a sweater on a cat.

I just want to know if it's possible for a reviewer to not use the term "blandly pretty" in reference to the characters. I know the NYTimes review used it several times.

WhoWhatWhere: I went to the midnight Thursday showing, and was also disappointed that the Star Trek preview was not shown.

I always watch all the credits and heard the whisper at the end. I couldn't make out what was said, so thank you to the commenter who posted it above. It was driving me crazy!

Warning to all: do NOT see it in the IMAX theater, and do NOT sit closer than halfway to the screen (unless you enjoy violent headaches and nausea).

I CANNOT emphasize enough how nauseating the camera work is. I had to leave and then could only come back and watch the rest standing up, head against the wall, hidden in the entrance to the theater. If you are prone to motion sickness at all, don't pay for the torture.

Wow - I'm surprised how many people are saying they really liked this movie because it SUCKED!!!! Man, I was seriously offended by this thing. It's just a bunch of jacking off - "look at us, we have a video camera and we're making it move!"

Whoopee.

And how dare you blaspheme, Daniel, by invoking the name of "Alien" in your review. If anyone puts this movie in the same league as "Alien" then I weep for the future of the motion picture industry.

This film is a 2-minute youtube skit drawn out into a "taut" (read: interminable) 90 minutes.

"SPOILER ALERT": NOTHING HAPPENS!

Save the $ on a movie ticket and watch all the trailers online all in a row and you've basically seen the film.

These guys are bigger wankers than George Lucas.

It's funny - I get serious motion sickness from reading in cars and even from the head bobbing feature on some first-person-shooter video games, but this movie didn't bother me at all. To be fair, I was in the rear half of the theater, but it was pretty much the front of the rear half.

"These guys are bigger wankers than George Lucas."

Posted by: MaryWoo

----------------------------------

Nobody is a bigger wanker than George Lucas.

Nobody.

I also got horrible motion sickness from this movie. It happened as soon as the action started picking up and I tried to tough it out by I ended up having to leave the theater and sit in the bathroom for about 20 minutes only to try to return and getting sick again. So I ended up sitting in the hallway till the movie ended, to wait for the people I was with. But I can say that it sounded like it was fun, I was REALLY into before I got sick.

The whole experience was so awful that I just wished I had been warned. At least three other people in the theater were getting motion sickness didn't anyone in the test audience get sick!? A simple "may cause motion sickness" before the movie, or even posted by the theater, that's all! Or even a warning in the reviews!

I'm trusting you Dan. I'm going to go see this tonight, and I'm trusting you.

I am a bit surprised at the vehement reaction from a lot of you. I don't trust Abrams as far as I can throw him after what happened with Alias, but come on. I haven't seen this sort of reaction since the review of Saw III.

I am going to agree with Smokin in saying, I am trusting you Dan. This movie is already out on DVD here in Kiev, so I think I will buy it. But if it sucks, then it was only $4 lost.

Abrams often plays as if he's the smartest guy in the room. And that gets him into trouble with his audiences.

I felt no inkling of motion sickness, unlike the Bourne Ultimatum, where a simple conversation was going to make me hurl. But I can't attest to what others might experience.

As for the negative reaction, it depends on what you went in looking for. This movie is exactly what the ads promise: monster attacks city, landmarks and cities are destroyed, pretty people run, pretty people die, monster rampages. If you want to read allegories to 9/11 or modern culture or anything else, that's on you.

I'm guessing some people would look at The Road Warrior as a warning tale of our demise due to our dependence on foreign oil or Independence Day as a fearful reminder of the threat looming from illegal immigration.

Dan, I agree with your review completely. It's flaws certainly work in its favor--because we, as the audience, know what to expect around certain corners, we are allowed to sit back and enjoy how it plays out.

I recommend this movie to anyone with a sense of humor and the ability to suspend disbelief. Watch Godzilla v. King Kong, first. It is a wonderful cinematic juxtaposition.

Not sure if it's been pulled yet but there is a crappy cell phone capture of the star trek XI teaser. Supposedly Monday we will see the "official" teaser at yahoo/apple.

I've never seen Lost, but I enjoyed MI:3 even though Tom Cruise is in it. I'm still hoping "Star Trek" will be decent. It's still Star Trek XI to me.

I see the comments here are pretty mixed here concerning Cloverfield. Probably wont see Cloverfield in the theater just for the ST trailer, it should be posted Monday, or will eventually be.

Cloverfield looks like a rental for me based on the mixed reviews here.

Oh, and the opening of Alias, at least when I watched it first two seasons...there's a jag that "blows up"...anyone else notice the engine bay is EMPTY?

If you're going to blow up a damn car that's stripped of heavy parts, do it with the hood closed, don't pop the car up (and the hood, and the doors fly off....meh) and show me an empty engine bay. That's just terribly insulting.

On top of that, though, the story is boring (monster destroys city - giant who cares)

Yeah, uh, that was pretty much clear from the get-go. If you thought the city-destroying monster part was boring, why did you bother to see it in the first place? What exactly propelled you into the theater for a giant monster movie if you didn't want to see the giant monster destroying the city?

I will admit, I haven't seen it and won't try to challenge your opinion until I do, but that line was quite off-putting.

As far as the Abrams-hate: As I saw it, the decline in both Alias and Lost happened after he left the projects. So does he really deserve all the blame?

Aww spork...Someone got their panties in a twist today? Which one of the writers here appointed you the grammer police? Come on...let us know...

fantastic review. i had a premonition before the movie ever started that it could be riot inducing. i saw it on 11th st and 3rd ave in manhattan. about half the crowd thought they were going to be involved in a passive action/ monster film, while the other half seemed to be a little savvy to the style and inventive marketing techniques for the film. as the credits began to roll there were loud boos and roars of applause, people yelling their opinions at whoever would listen, and about 3 separate incidences where fights almost broke out in defense of someones criticisms. thats what i fucking love about the movies and why i thought this movie was so successful and why i think it is great that paramount would take such a chance on a big budget action film that abandons every single genre convention save for the narrative ones and helped to create what was essentially a big budget remake of the Blair Witch Project, which if im thinking correctly was one of the first indie films to utilize viral marketing back when the internet was still exploding.

You know, as far as those little baby monsters being derivative...as a hip 20-something whose seen her fair share of classic and cliched horror/monster flicks, had I been in the subway tunnels and heard little clicking noises and seen rats running, I probably wouldn't have stopped several times to look back, and been all:
"Hey, here, let me turn on the night vision."
"Whoa, your camera has night vision?"
"Yeah, oh, and it has these other cool washes like sepia. Ooo and its got this neat-o strap so you can hook it onto your backpack..."
No, I would've said, "Yeah you mess with the camera, fools, I'ma run real fast with these rats 'cause I KNOW those click-y noises mean 'monster gonna eat me.'" But hey, maybe all your monster movie lore goes out the window when you're faced with the real thing. At least the one girl had the damn sense to take off her boot and beat the things with it rather than that other chick who ran in heels for six hours. More power to you, girlfriend.
I really was rooting for Hud, but did he really run with the camera up? Didn't his arm get tired?
And I wonder what the Asian guy said.
All in all, I enjoyed the film. Not life-changing, certainly, but entertaining.

Cloverfield was exactly what I thought it was going to be and I loved it. It was scary, tense, and very well done. I'm not sure what some of you people were expecting. There were 8 college kids in front of us that loudly proclaimed during the credits "That sucked!", "It had no point!", "I wanted an explanation!" 6 of them filed out bitching while 2 of them stayed behind talking to each other about it. It's either a love it or hate it movie and from reading above it definitely is going to split viewers. For me it did remind me of how I felt on 9/11, being in my 20's in a major city when the attacks happened. Total panic, utter confusion, and no answers for several hours. Yeah it trotted out some standard plot points but it presented them in a fresh way. It's well worth seeing and I didn't see anyone get sick in our packed matinee. But you definitely don't want to be hungover or drunk when you see it.

Because I get motion sick, I won't see the movie, but I just had to comment:

poopadoop,
someONE is singular, so you would need to say "SomeONE got HIS OR HER panties in a twist". Also, grammar is spelled with an A not an E.

Don't rag on people who like correct grammar unless you can do so correctly.

Let's be fair on the Alias subject V. The show declined after he left, yes. But he never left, he was just concentrating on other things. Namely Lost, which I still refuse to watch out of my own over-inflated sense of offense that he let Alias die a horrible, and if we're being honest, lackluster death.

I still can't get over all you people loving this shitpile.

I don't want gimmicks when I go to the movies, I want a story. Abrams can't deliver a story! He can play camera tricks, build suspense, consistently fail to deliver a payoff, but he can't tell a story worth a shit.

Really now. What other reason is there to see a film, but to watch a story? If you want tricks, go watch David Copperfield grope some woman on stage.

Well Spork, apparently people have these things called opinions, and they vary and even sometimes your opinion ends up in the minority and you can either shrug your shoulders and move on or get bitterly angry about it.

Of course, depending on the issue either option can be valid.

Either way I don't give two craps about JJ Abrams I don't really know anything about him or recognized he was involved until after watching the movie and reading other's responses. And yeah, I liked it.

If that means I suck Abrams cock, well at least I'm getting protein in my diet.

So is this it?
http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee302/Soad6666/6slpa2u.gif

(link found on malcontent's blog)

I was so psyched to see this movie and was pissed that I had to leave 20 mins into it. It was like exquisite torture. Even before the action started, the handheld camera swung back and forth and all over the place. I am sensitive to this kind of stuff but even if I wasn't I think that it was excessive.

I wish I could have stuck it out since the movie is suposed to be so great, but I was nauseated for hours even though I left early and had my eyes shut for most of the time I was even in the theatre.

I'm with MaryWoo on this. I can't remember the last movie I saw where I just sat there completely bored the entire time. I really appreciate what they were trying to attempt, but ultimately it just didn't work. The characters were excessively bland with Hud only delivering about 2 or 3 funny lines in total. The romance between the leading dude and his lady was so unbelievable (and uninteresting) that his quest to go back for her seemed less motivated by love and more motivated by him being completely fucking insane. The few minutes the monster was actually on screen was pretty underwhelming and I just kept wondering when something cooler was going to happen. Yeah it smashed up some buildings, but not on a grander scale than we've seen before.
Anyway, I hear this Host movie is supposed to be far superior, so I'll give it a check. For some reason, Asians know how to keep me on the edge of my seat.

anything that isn`t a chick flick sounds acceptable.By default this should kick some ass at the box-office,bucket list my ass

By default, this would be the movie I'd be seeing this weekend. And I actually really do kind of want to see it. Unfortunately, no one else I know does so I just bought Stardust, yay!

I love how people can rationalize certain things. If it's a director you are "supposed" to love, like Abrams, then you can "suspend belief and enjoy it" aka have fun with a dumb movie. But heaven forbid a guy like Michael Bay (someone you are supposed to hate, according to Pajiba) makes a movie, then you must declare it the worst movie ever. I fail to see the difference between Transformers (which I saw and hated) and this movie (which I saw and hated)...I hate you nerds so much.

I'm glad to see people actually thought this movie was decent. I saw it this morning and when I told friends this evening that I had skipped Juno for Cloverfield they were like, "Are you serious? How could you do that?" There was no convincing them that Cloverfield was well-executed and enjoyable. Oh well. At least I had fun. Juno next time.

this movie...made so fucking me sick. I vomited all the way from the theater to my place. I wish I had been given a warning...anything. Though I should have figured out that if I can't stand first-person shooter games for more than 5 minutes there was no way I could have watched the film without hurling in front of everyone by the popcorn both.

F. Pants McFadden said:

I felt like I was watching the attack of the love child of the Alien creature and the Starship Troopers enemy.

Now that's the best summation of this film I've heard so far. You rock.

This movie was tedious. The camerawork, the dumber-that-usual characters (if you could call them that), and yes, MaryWoo, Abrams managed to make a boring monster movie.

This is an advertising campaign in search of a movie. Superman Returns was more pleasurable, and I hated it too.

I do not normally get too worked up at movies, but the handheld camera work, and the immediacy it provided, made this movie so much more personal that it really affected me. My son and I LOVED it. For those who haven't seen it yet, I won't give anything away, but I will say this....after coming home and reading more on-line about it, I want to go back and watch the very last scene more closely and watch it thru to the very end of the credits.

This movie was awesome! The monster(s) is completely indescribable, Hud was fantastic, and it all seemed very organic. Loved it. Have heard talk that there may be more "found footage" out there. God, I hope so!

I hate Alias, MI3, and Lost, and I think Cloverfield is great. What does that mean?

My and my crew all agreed this flick got two thumbs "meh". I think if it had been more about them trying to get away from the monster, rather than saving a chick I didn't care to see live or die, I would have enjoyed it much more. I was more personally invested in every other character than in Sarah. I didn't mind so much that nothing got resolved and no mysteries were unraveled.

heaven forbid a guy like Michael Bay (someone you are supposed to hate, according to Pajiba) makes a movie, then you must declare it the worst movie ever.

I liked Transformers in the movie theater. It was dumb and loud and fun! Exactly what I want out of Michael Bay!

I think some people see the names and immediately think "Oh he does stuff I like" or "His material is garbage."

I never caught onto Alias nor do I find Lost that exciting or groundbreaking. I liked Cloverfield because it was a monster movie. That's what I went in expecting and it's what I got.

Rocky wrote:
"This is an advertising campaign in search of a movie."

Awesome, perfect description. Maybe I would have enjoyed the movie more if I had been paying attention to the new wave advertising campaign. No one's mentioned this website slusho.jp. It ties into the movie, right? Is that supposed to add some depth to the thing? Check it out, but be warned - the music is really irritating.

Dave wrote: "Nobody is a bigger wanker than George Lucas."

You're absolutely right.
My father's told me 100 million times never to exaggerate.

Yeah, I can tell you weren't invested because her name was actually Beth, not Sarah. Hah! I completely agree - not only did I NOT care about her, but as the other characters began dropping, I began to resent her and wish she'd just DIE.

Cliches? Rife with it. Jerky nausea-inducing camera work? True enough. Little buglet creatures been done a million times before? Absolutely. Vacuous, pretty, cardboard actors? Check. But...totally dead on in terms of tone and feeling. Don't freaking overanalyze the thing, don't try to pick it apart. It is what it is, and it's pretty stinkin' good.

Methinks someone should conduct a study on the apparent plague-level increase of motion sickness-prone youth in the world.

I saw "Cloverfield" on Saturday. It is fucking terrifying. I loved it.

Haven't seen it yet. But let me just say that I'll be very disappointed if by the end, ALL, of these GAP commercial rejects are either dismembered, or at least maimed in some horrible way.

Make that: *aren't

oy

Meh.

Good not great.

If the movie is going to be from a handheld camera then why have everything look so good? It was obviously filmed on an extremely high-end HD cam and it kinda takes you out of the reality of it. You buy Blair Witch because it really did look like it was from a normal consumer camera. More real life I guess you could say.

Also.

Enough with the F'ing crab-like aliens in every damn sci-fi movie(and video game). Ever since Starship Troopers we have had to deal with fast moving exoskeleton crab-like aliens. Enough already. Come up with something different already.

I won't be seeing this movie yet for about a week. My siblings all want to see this, but after the disaster that was I Am Legend, they want to wait a weekend to see this, instead of seeing it opening weekend. The reason, as my sister put it, is that way, all the douches will have seen it by then, and we won't have to deal with them. Yay!

Downside is, of course, I'll not be reading this review or the comments until afterwards, so as not to ruin the surprise. Please don't let it be Godzilla.

I found this movie excruciatingly unbearable. The predictable plot points left me feeling like I'd watched a movie that accomplished nothing. The characters were paper-thin, ensuring that I felt no empathy for them. And the epi-cam cinematography guaranteed that I bounced between annoyed and nauseated.

It was like they took that night-vision subway scene from 28 Weeks Later and stretched it out to a full-length movie.

This movie annoyed me. I'm sorry..but if Rob had pulled half the shit he did with me..or any of the friends I saw the film with, we would have told him to fuck himself and go save his fake girlfriend on his own.

It would have been a much better film documenting them trying to escape, instead of trying to save someone who might already dead--and I really wish had been.

I personally give very little credit for this film's success to JJ Abrams. Lost is a bullshit circle jerk and has been from day one. I don't for a minute believe that Abrams has had any idea of what was happening on the island, and his habit of filming water treading sequences built to promise that SOMETHING will happen one day does nothing to change my mind. Seems he is far more interested in the hype machine he conjures around each of his projects. His next, an X-Files clone for Fox, will definitely disappoint.

That out of the way, Cloverfield worked in almost every way it could have. Minor complaints are, as follows: the blandness of all of the leads. It was like an episode of The OC in this department. I don't care to see any of those manicured five o'clock shadows again, but I suspect that that look came with the actors. The women were hobbled by consistently good hair no matter what the scene involved. Near the end of the film when the dull male lead finally found his rich pretty young thing her perfect hair and sleeping doll expression deflated any sense of tension or drama that moment might have held and instead made it more of a soap opera-light rescue set piece.

The monster, like Paul Bunyan before him, changed scale several times, it seemed. When he bloodlessly killed the camera carrying void, he seemed to be a tenth the size he was when he was strolling through downtown. And in that moment, it seemed a little odd that the other two would retrieve the camera, doesn't it? If they hadn't, that would have been the end of the film, but there was no attempt to explain that little gesture.

Still, it was a great hour and a half. It's a big screen movie, and the effects are really amazing. I'd recommend it to anybody that likes those summer action movies. It felt like July in that theater.

I saw this yesterday afternoon before football and it was pretty much exactly what I thought it'd be. A sort of "first person" take on a giant-ass monster attack of New York City.

In that, it didn't disappoint at all. The scenes were appropriately intense. The effects were great.

The dialogue was a lot of "Oh my god! Rob! Oh my god! Rob! Holy Shit! Rob! Rob! Did you see that? Rob!", but that's exactly what I expected most of the dialogue to be. I thought they did a decent job of establishing the characters very quickly, enough so that you cared about them, and then getting into the action.

I am lucky in that that type of camera work doesn't bother me at all. Both my dad and brother had some issues with it.

My biggest gripe with the film was exactly what Craig mentioned above. The little monsters were totally uninspired and completely generic. I had no issue at all with the big monster, which seemed relatively unique. I would have much preferred if the little creatures were a little more unique perhaps... slimier or with tentacles, something a little more Lovecraftian if you will.

Spork, I may not agree with your opinion on the movie, but thanks for calling out the "could of." That fills me with a fiery rage, because editors dont catch it either. I see it in text books and bestselling novels...Agh!

As for Cloverfield, I enjoyed it for the most part...I didn't give a damn about the characters, but I guess you weren't supposed to. Mainly I just felt like someone turned off the movie while I was still watching it. I wanted to know more about that monster. Not necessarily its origins, but at least to see him rampage some more...something. JJ loves his cliffhangers I guess. Overall not bad, though I did have some "Im going to hurl" moments.

I loved it! Everything I went into this movie expecting was there. They didn't overuse the CG, I didn't see the monster more than necessary, and nothing was explained. In short, it felt real because I didn't feel like there was a "story." I didn't care about the people on screen, and I didn't go into the theatre expecting that I would. If you can immerse yourself into Hud's role (Think of yourself as the cameraman), it's a really intense movie. I highly recommend it.

P.S. For some of you who might be worried, I get terrible motion sickness in the car, but I had absolutely no problem with this movie. To my mind, the shakiness really added to the tension because you never get a very good look at *anything*.

Boy, I'd like to respond, MG, but pajiba apparently doesn't like me any more.

I've seen it twice now. Pay attention, there are small comments made off camera, important images in the backgrounds, especially in the final shot.

As Dave and MaryWoo confirm, nobody has done more to destroy our dreams than George Lucas. I mean, honestly, he's the asshole who taped over the original Star Wars trilogy with Magnum P.I. episodes.

Eli hate this movie.
Eli feel that sucker is born every ten years.
Eli go watch Blair Witch Project instead.
Eli hate that movie too.

Y'know, I don't think the nausea is caused by the camera work. Isn't there some sort of subaural vibration that can cause unease and nausea? I don't get motion sickness even if I read in a moving car, but halfway through this I was ready to blow popcorn chunks. If not for that, 'Cloverfield' wouldn't have been half bad for a brainless monster movie. As it stands, I wish I'd seen 'Alvin and the Chipmunks' with my girlfriend's son. At least the suckiness wouldn't have fucked with my equilibrium.

5 minutes in I was ready to believe that the film was really a joke and that the actual monster was that GIANT FREAKING HAIR waggling and vibrating all over the place. It was thick and nasty and crossed half of the screen and distracting the hell of everybody. I was half waiting for it to morph in some kind of badtrippy j-horror abstract killing blackness (Anybody else here think this could actually be awesome?)

Eli go downstairs now.

Eli want a drink of water.

Eli go boom-boom.

Eli.

Ok, to those who have seen it, how does the shaky-cam compare to the Bourne Ultimatum? If it is the same or less as Bourne, I'll see it in theatres, if it's more shaky, I'll rent it.

Bourne Ultimatum gave me a headache, this one didn't, even though I'd say it was shakier in parts.

Thanks :)

Wow. Talk about mixed comments. Sounds like this was a love/hate type of film. Either you go just for the effects and not the story and you love it. Or you go for the story and not the effects and you hate it. Well I haven't seen it but since I'm over 30 and effects don't have the same draw as they used to I think I'll just rent it or put it on my netflix que.

Oh, and I totally understand why alot of New Yorkers who were there on 9/11 would have a more emotional ride than others. I'm from south Mississippi and stayed for Hurricane Katrina. I didn't realize the impact until I tried to watch "The perfect storm" had to turn it off halfway through.

MOTION SICKNESS WARNING

I went to this movie and left after 30 minutes. The jerkiness of the camera made me want to throw up my dinner, so I went and got a refund. It turns out that a lot of people are getting nauseated from the "shaky-cam" presentation and it doesn't help when you have a tool like HUD operating it. That character really pissed me off, because he's like the fat friend that nobody likes, even though he tries to be sarcastic and funny. The entire yuppy cast did a great job of making you hate them for simply existing, which is why it was cool to see them die one by one.

Since theaters are now providing barf bags and warnings in the ticket booths, I hope those of you who would get sick don't waste your time with this dreadful film. Everybody dies but the monster.

No matter what -- do NOT LEAVE after the credits are done.

GREAT extras that most "critics" here MISSED.

:)

5 of us went to go see it opening night. I thought it was great as did most of us. One didn't enjoy it, but he doesn't really like movies. The guy next to me didn't make it 10 minutes before he got up and ran out quickly, tripping over most of our feet. Must have gotten sick from the camera :)



I saw this Cloverfield trailer parody on youtube called "Cloverfluff" and thought it was hilarious:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHHrA-HXHTo

**SPOILER ALERT**

I think it's pretty obvious where the monster came from. Did anyone notice right the end, when the camera shows Coney Island (1 month before the attack), in the far right side of the screen something falls from the sky? It's easy to miss but definitely there.

does anyone wish that the movie would've ended when the monster attacked the helicopter?

can we please agree that NYC was a target for disaster films prior to 9/11? "King Kong," "Independence Day," hell even "Ghostbusters" tore that shit up!! And while I can't give a first-hand opinion on this, I lost all interest in cloverfield when i heard there's no backstory given to the monster. that's all i've wanted to know about since the first preview i saw. is it true they don't go into it at all???

A sattalite dropped from the sky, from the same japanese company that owned the oil tanker from the begining of the film. 'Clover' was buried under the sea and was awokened by the downed sattalite. Clover had been underground for thousands of years.

This film was mediocre, at best. I don't know where you're getting all this "subtext" from, but really, you totally over shot this one.

I love kitchy Godzilla flicks...this is gonna be fun...going to see it this weekend

What I learned from Cloverfield: Only huge black men loot stores. Thanks Cloverfield! And also screw you. (And dangling one little white guy in the middle of the 15 black ones looting like a bunch of idiots doesn't make up for it, 'kay? 'Kay. I thought the stereotype was we black folk run first? Let's go back to that one.)

Other than that, it was ok. Other people have already covered the other problems I had with it. Plus, it didn't scare me, and as easily as I scare, that means it's pretty bland, but it did what it set out to do, more or less. As a New Yorker watching the film in Times Square, I got way too caught up in things like "But the 6 train doesn't GO to Columbus Circle, and you can't get there in 20 minutes when the system works WELL let alone on foot!!" and so did everyone around me. Not worth watching on DVD, and so I'm glad I saw it in the theater, but really, it was just an excuse to hang out with friends.

Taking the train home was creepy, though.

I seriously dought that he would put racism in a movie like that, but you never know about people. Great movie in my perspective. I don't really focus on every little detail in the movie. I just watch the movie and enjoy it. I think that's the way everyone should do it.

Hmmm...wow...how can Pajiba and so many others be so wrong. This movie sucked, I'm sorry, it just did. I felt zero emotional connection to the characters - rich New York hipsters, no thanks. Their problems were prepubescent, can't relate there, their life styles (the apartments of 20 somthings just don't look like that - it's a movie yes but one which is going for realism). I just could go on an on, the moster was pitiful it actually changed size from one shot to the next. I would have liked to have seen it actually eat someone, now that would have been freaky! Also, I noticed the young black men looting, how stupid is that. Beside the fact that a huge f...ing monster just stomped by and everyone would have been outa there, the looters would most likely have been white teens. The one good point was it was a little scarey at times but other than that this movie does not live up to the hype.