The template for many an inferior clone

Rating: Null/10 (2 February 2008)

This movie represents either the nadir or the zenith of modern film making. Shot on a tiny budge and with an unknown cast, a deceptively simple advertising campaign has turned it from just-another-monster-movie into what will probably become the most profitable film of the year. Whether it will make stars of its actors, director or anyone, other than JJ Abrams, is a moot point, people will be talking about Cloverfield for many years to come and, sadly, poor imitations will soon be crowding our screens, especially if the writers' strike persists.
So what makes Cloverfield so extraordinary? That can be summed up in a single word: restraint. Sure the viral advertising campaign that has garnered so many column inches since Transformers first aired was a massive operation, but it succeeded, just like the movie, because of restraint. Throughout the whole film there are only occasional shots of the monster and they're never stable or show the whole thing in relief. In retrospect, I'm not even sure what the monster looks like except that it has a tail! But that's nothing compared to the restraint in exposition. Everyone knows that the unknown, unseen menace is much more dangerous than an identified, quantifiable antagonist, but it must've been less apparent that you could shoot an entire movie without answering a single one of the obvious questions. What is this monster? Where did it come from? How did it come to New York? Why is it dropping off little insect things with some very nasty bites? We don't even find out what fate befalls many of the characters, except the near certainty that several of them die. Yet this sparseness of information, just like the marketing for this movie, works to whet your appetite, not turn off your interest. Right now IMDb is getting a post a minute on its Cloverfield forum and that is only going to increase as the weekend progresses. Where Abrams takes his behemoth next will be the topic of much of that speculation, although I admit I haven't got the faintest idea what the answer is.
So, what about the film then? Sure it's puzzling, tantalising and motion sickness inducing, but is it any good? My answer is again I'm not sure. You see, the fact is, I came out of this movie wanting more, which is Hollywood's idea of heaven. But I'm not yet convinced this film is that great. All the characters are fairly bland, their motivations not entirely believable. The monster does eventually get revealed, pretty much in its entirety, but also appears both indestructible and curiously focused on our hapless band of New Yorkers. And the helicopter really should've flown at a higher altitude. I can't stress that enough. IT SHOULD'VE FLOWN AT A HIGHER ALTITUDE! I mean come on, it was flying through an area about to get blown to hell and back.
That brings up the main problem with the movie. Cloverfield makes an excellent job of generating our suspension of disbelief for the monster: it has turned up, we don't know why and neither do the characters so let's just get the hell out of there! I can believe all that. I just find it less believable that cell phones could work in such a situation (the networks were jammed for days during and after 9/11), the military lay on helicopters for civilians who ignored the mandatory evacuation, the little monsters get a hold of just about everyone in the tunnel but only bite one of them, those little critters also wait until the night vision is switched on before attacking and so forth.
Little questions like this are the scourge of films like Cloverfield, but that doesn't mean they still don't detract from the experience of the movie. However, the fact is that this film still swept me away with its visceral thrill ride, although I strongly advise no one to sit within ten rows of an even medium sized screen. From the sitcom style build up where everyone is in tangles over their love lives to the sudden transition to terror when the ground shakes and the lights go out everything is very immediate and, with no music and a shaky camera, very realistic.
Sure there are questions that occur, not least how incredibly close to exploiting 9/11 Abrams and his team have sailed with this movie, but those queries nearly all arise after the film has finished during it, you have little to no thought but for what's happening on screen. In short, though I can't rate it as, from one moment to the next, this movie sinks from ten stars to six before shooting right back up again, I would strongly recommend that you go and see Cloverfield and decide for yourself. If nothing else, that will stop you from having the entire concept spoilt for you by other people that, and the fact that this is a movie that definitely requires viewing on the largest screen available... and before every other producer in Hollywood tries to generate the clones that will, with depressing frequently, be turning up in multiplexes for ever more.