Post a Comment        E-mail To A Friend        Join The List

Matt Reeves, Cloverfield

by Chris Flippo
01/22/2008

Cloverfield is one of those movies that brings out the hopeless twelve-year-old fanboy in you. The movie (though running a scant 80 minutes) is filled to the breaking point with everything fans of the genre love. Right now, it is almost difficult to write an objective review. It’s the type of film where you must tread carefully or you’ll start sounding like Harry Knowles.

The film, as has been well-reported, takes the form of a video tape that has been found in an area “formerly know as Central Park.” The footage follows a group of twenty-somethings as they plan a going-away party for their friend, Rob (Michael-Stahl David). We eventually gather that he is being promoted to a high-paying job in Japan and will be leaving in the morning. The camera operator, Hud (T.J. Miller), moves around the party, recording the little dramas that happen between young, rich thirty-year-olds. These opening moments give us quick insight into the main characters, such as Rob’s unrequited love for best friend, Beth (Odette Yutsman).

Suddenly, an explosion appears on the horizon. The lights go off. A few tremors are felt. Rob and his friends turn on the news to see that the city is being evacuated. After more details come in, we begin to understand that something has attacked the city. When Rob finds out that Beth is trapped in lower Manhattan, he and his friends decide to go in and rescue her.

As preposterous (or even routine) as that description may sound, Cloverfield is a movie I can’t quite shake. There have seen dozens of monster movies before, featuring every type of reptile, gorilla, or dinosaur imaginable, but there has never been anything like this. Somehow the experience of actually watching Cloverfield is so... real. The film is smart enough to know that looking down at a monster attacking the city is not that scary. However, a monster looking down at you is actually quite scary, and Cloverfield mines this for all that it is worth.

As for the “gimmick” of the movie, say what you will, but it is extremely effective. Yes, you will hear groans from the crowd about the shaky camera work and poor film quality. However, how Cloverfield presents itself is what elevates the material. Besides, the world doesn’t need another traditional monster movie. It has had enough of those. It is time for the genre to be turned on its side.

Of course, this does not mean that Cloverfield glosses over what makes the genre so much fun in the first place. At the end of the day, this is a still a monster movie, and the film gives us plenty of action scenes (albeit unconventional ones). One scene in particular involving a subway tunnel and the camera’s night vision mode is particularly effective.

As for the monster itself, it is more or less what one would hope for. Thankfully, it is not a Godzilla clone or a King Kong rip-off. Those of you hoping for some juicy spoilers pertaining to its appearance are going to be short-changed. Sorry, Dear Reader, but I could not describe the monster to you if I tried. This isn’t because we never see it (Cloverfield actually gives us one long terrifying look at the monster toward the film’s end). No, I can not describe the monster because I have no frame of reference for what it looks like. The creature appears otherworldly, alright, and it appears that it can not be killed by any ordinary means. This supernatural quality makes for one of the most effective screen monsters in years.

Its now been eight months since moviegoers first laid their eyes on that unforgettable teaser trailer. Since then, we have had an onslaught of perhaps the farthest reaching viral marketing campaign ever made. We’ve had fake web sites, fake advertisements, fake myspace pages, you name it. However, that complex (and unnecessary) marketing scheme is ultimately to serve a very simple story. It’s a monster movie, alright, but one that proves how effective the genre can be when properly done.