Monday, January 14, 2008

cloverfield was disappointing

Source: (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1060277/)

i will list my thoughts:

  • shakey cam was awful. i have a headache now. i'm drinking ginger ale to settle my stomach.
  • jj abrams, you like flashbacks. yes, you do. yes, you do.
  • for a jj abrams production, you'd think there would be some substance or meat to the plot. oddly enough, there isn't.
  • the monster was ok. godzilla would've whooped its ass though. i think they could've done more with the "others" though.
  • the "narrator" was annoying.
  • the cameraman spent a lot of time looking at female legs. (i didn't mind.)
  • the special effects were cool, when you actually saw them.
  • the movie was way too short. only 80 minutes.
  • a very similar movie was the host. i think the host > cloverfield.
good idea but subpar execution. if you're looking to see manhattan explode and blurry shakey shots of a monster, then knock yourself out. if you're looking for a great film, don't bother. it is what it is. 2.64/4.

3 comments:

Geoff said...

my thoughts exactly.

Anonymous said...

I just saw it too. I was very excited for it and I had hoped it would be multi-layered in an "I'll have to see it a second time" kinda way, but it's very straightforward.

Some nice moments. The best being the subway tunnel. The night cam moment was a total steal from The Descent (which is a WAY better movie) but it was still pretty scary.

I wanted more depth. I wanted some plot.

Not bad. Must try harder.

Anonymous said...

reasons i didnt like it like millions of others.
1.the camcorder filming thing,like 94% of it was them running and shaky recording.

2. they only showed the monster perfectly like 4 10 seconds kinda at the end.