Bettr than I expected.

Rating: 6/10 (8 June 2010)

Cloverfield is set in New York City as a farewell party for Rob Hawkins (Michael Stahl-David) who has got a new job in Japan & is leaving soon, all his friends are there but after a row with his girlfriend Beth (Odette Yustman) she takes off. Then suddenly the ground shakes, looking outside the guests see huge explosions & building's collapsing. Soon it becomes apparent that a huge monster is making it's way through Manhattan destroying everything in it's path, Rob phone's Beth & learns that she is hurt, together with his best friend Hud (T.J. Miller) & a couple of girls from the party Rob decides to rescue Beth who is trapped inside her apartment but with a huge monster on the loose & the US military trying to kill it there's plenty of obstacles in their way...
Directed by Matt Reeves I have to say that I enjoyed Cloverfield for what it was even though I didn't expect to, in fact I usually rant on about how I hate the modern hand-held jerky camera movement that to me just looks awful but here in Cloverfield it's used to good effect. The best way to describe Cloverfield would be a giant monster film like Godzilla (1998) but told from the perspective of a bunch of normal people caught up in the situation unaware of what is happening & acting on instinct. The idea that you would want to save your friends & family is perfectly natural to me although if you would go up against a huge monster to do so is another issue I suppose, I really liked the average person perspective actually & the character's here do feel quite natural & ordinary. Portable video devices are everywhere these days so recording the events isn't a stretch either although that camera does seem quite robust considering what it goes through. While watching some of the spectacular sequences in Cloverfield I couldn't help but think if this was meant to be a 9/11 thing with terrified people on the ground running from falling buildings & the utter confusion, fear & panic that would inevitably happen. At only 80 odd minutes this moves along like a rocket & after the first fifteen minutes never lets up, I thought it was pretty gripping & intense & I liked the downbeat ending as well, far too many Hollywood films take the easy happy option. Having said that Cloverfield isn't perfect, there is no explanation about the monsters origin or it's fate & I am not sure it would stand up to multiple viewings.
The whole realistic shaky hand-held camera really does give the impression that your watching events unfold from some guy's point of view but it is a little too dark at times & a little too jerky although I am sure these were intentional by the makers. There's no real gore or violence, just a splash of blood really, Some of the CGI effects are very impressive, the monster itself, building's falling down, explosions & the Statue of Liberty's head getting dumped in the middle of New York. When you think about it though the makers of Cloverfield went to great lengths & probably spent a fair bit of money trying to make it look as low tech & low budget as they could, does anyone else see any sort of irony in that? Apart from during the end credits Cloverfield has no musical score & again that gives it a realistic feel.
Filmed in just 34 days in Los Angeles & New York on a $25,000,000 budget Cloverfield looks cheap & inept but that was a very deliberate look & some of the CGI effects are very impressive. The acting by total unknown's is pretty good to be fair.
Cloverfield is a monster film that tries to tell it's story from the viewpoint of the ordinary person, the person who is terrified & doesn't know what it going on & only instinct is make sure his family & friends are safe. It's also a 9/11 film, the imagery & it's implication is too blatant to be merely coincidence.