Original

Rating: 7/10 (4 May 2008)

Cloverfield made me curious when it came out. The whole thing with the film-makers not wanting to give anything away before the release has been done before. And the other similarities to "Godzilla" were also worrying... But i chose to ignore them and feel curious nevertheless. Cloverfield looked it had something pretty unique to offer. But you never know until you actually watch it.
And was it unique? Both yes and no i guess. The whole "monster attacks New York"-thing is old as King Kong. But Cloverfield did have a few things to offer that sets it apart from most other movies. First of all the whole home-movie style works pretty well. We only get to see what the people in the movie see, nothing else. It creates both a sense of urgency and actually being there. That was a good move. I might also mention that the camera work is still not that bad considering it's supposed to be handy-cam. The picture is clear, the effects are really good and there is very little of nausea i can feel sometimes when the camera is waved around a lot.
There are however a few things that i didn't like as much. While Cloverfield highlights the way the feel of a movie can really benefit from an unusual approach (handycams), it also shows one of the classic weaknesses of horror movies. Namely the monster itself. I'm afraid it works just as bad as it did in Godzilla. In the end the movie is also a more or less standardized action movie with a more interesting presentation.
I did like Cloverfield fairly well. I think there are things that could have been done better. Not least the monster (how hard can it be?) and also it could have been more experimental with the story, like it was with the presentation of the story. But in the end this movie is pretty original and i did enjoy it. I think it's good to see something that at least tries to break the mold a little bit. I rate it 7/10.