What other people say about Cloverfield [Blu-ray]

Main Categories

Cloverfield [Blu-ray] From:Mike Vogel , T.J. Miller , Lizzy Caplan , Jessica Lucas , Odette Yustman , Paramount , Matt Reeves ,
See Product Page	User Rating:Amazon Sales Rank:#2583

Page: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 126 >>
1 of 3 customers found the following review helpful: I wish I could give it 0 stars!, 2008-11-04 You know a movie is bad when it is set in New York but named after a road in Santa Monica, CA..... This gives you an idea how unimaginative and mindless the movie is. I didn't mind the cinimatography. However there wasn't really a plot to peak of, the characters were pretty lame, and the monster was pretty one-dimensional. In general, I say don't bother with this movie. Lean, taut thriller marred by empty characters and obvious-reliance on other movies, 2008-10-30 If you've seen Robert Altman's "The Player," you've seen the stereotypical Hollywood pitch - "It's 'Deliverance' meets 'Ordinary People' meets 'Marathon Man,' but it's got a heart." Movies are defined by how they reference other movies - that's how they get sold in today's bottom-line driven, play-it-safe Hollywood culture. "Cloverfield" was easily pitched as "It's 'Blair Witch' meets 'Godzilla' meets 'Aliens' meets 'Friends,' with a paean to 9/11 thrown in." Adopting the same fiction of "BW" - that we've found the videotape capturing horrific yet mostly unseen events happening to real people - "Cloverfield" tells the thankfully-terrifying tale of a gargantuan monster tearing apart Manhattan. Unfortunately, while we cared about Heather, Josh and Mike to some degree in "BW," we really can't muster up any empathy for the cadre of uber-hip twenty-somethings "Cloverfield" throws us into. These are obviously people who dress according to magazine covers and have memorized the cliched roles from "Friends." There's a Ross-Rachel love story going on involving two leads, while the guy's brother and best friend throw him a going-away party that the best friend videotapes. This follows the tired cliche of everyone on the tape talking about the lovers' "secret undying love for each other." The guy is even going to Japan, for God's sake, just like Ross did in a plot contrivance to keep the Ross-Rachel story "interesting" for another bloated season. This tripe occupies the first fifteen minutes, and then thankfully the monster shows up. The movie's handling of the monster is its greatest strength, as the monster is shown in terrifying glimpses and quick shots. This thing is a behemoth, destroying the Brooklyn Bridge with an accidental swipe of its tail. Perhaps more terrifying, it drops space-lice from its skin that are miniature demons straight out of "Starship Troopers" crossed with the baddies from "Aliens." This is scary stuff. The story follows our intrepid band of twits as they try to first escape Manhattan and then to save the girlfriend, Beth. Manhattan is destroyed, convincingly, by both the monster and the U.S. Army. The movie never really explains what's going on, and this leads to several truly terrifying and shocking moments I won't spoil here. But this part of the movie is what "Godzilla" should have been. Unfortunately, the videotape of the carnage is recorded over the lovers' tryst, so we get perfectly-timed snippets of their relationship-bliss intercut with the action. If we cared about these two, I suppose it would rise to powerful stuff a la "Titanic," but since we don't, the love story is an annoying distraction. Much has been made of the jerky handicam style of the movie. I saw it on DVD, so the TV screen was probably more merciful than a full size movie screen. But I think those who are nauseated by the jerkiness of the camera are reflecting their distaste for the characters. After all, when Steven Spielberg went all herky-jerky with the opening scenes of "Saving Private Ryan," it was hailed as a high-water mark of filmmaking. There's a great difference between watching the storming of Normandy than there is watching the lives of twits being rent asunder, colossal monster or no colossal monster. 2 of 3 customers found the following review helpful: Less is more, 2008-10-24 This is one of my favorite action movies. "Cloverfield" may not be so original when it comes to hand-held camera, but the constriction of the scenes made me come out of the theater trying to visualize the rest. It really stayed with me in a way that I had to go back for more. Yes, I saw it three times now and the DVD is now part of my collection. JJ Abram did a good job, I must say. And it's true when they say that less is more. You don't need to see the monster all the time. It is already there through the growling, the fast glimpses and the chaotic movement of the characters. I felt like a real monster had attacked New York and the scenes kept rolling on my mind. I does make you a little dizzy because of the unsteady camera, but that serves the movie right, giving the audience a vivid impression of what it looks like to be in the middle of a war. JJ Abrams wanted an American monster film and I guess he did it. I loved it! 1 of 3 customers found the following review helpful: Cloverfield manages to be awesome and terrible at the same time., 2008-10-23 This movie has 3 major problems: 1 - It takes entirely too long for the monster thing to attack, up to that point it's a How To guide for anyone who wants to write a pathetically boring Relationship struggle movie. 2 - Once the truly interesting part of the film begins, it all ends far to quickly. And Even though the Idea of keeping the Monster largely off camera is pretty compelling, a lot of the shaking camera stuff failed to enthrall me as much as give me a migraine. 3 - I guess I'm not allowed to share spoilers, so let me just say, the plot (besides the "Giant Monster in Manhattan" bit) is just awful and I'll leave it at that. However, visuals, audio, and the rest were overall entertaining. This is not a bad movie, but check your brain at the door. Cloverfield makes a milestone but whould the Real film inside Film Please Stand up?, 2008-10-20 Excellent old idea taken to a new level of originality. Scenes in this picture reminded me of 9/11 and were intense. Very good effects and terrific acting. I would highly suggest this film. My only issue is they handed that camera to the worst camera guy at the begining of the film. That was annoying. Reminded me of some of the worst times during other similar films. What other films? Well since you've asked... The last Broadcast good idea poor acting claims to have been the first blair witch St Francisville Experement. Same concept on the paranormal... none-the-less a true story of the paranomral. I loved it. Blair Witch Project.... Let down... but fun experiement that taught me that films like this were better in a vcr or dvd player... Cloverfield added more professional work to break that thought. Finally.... the true original.... the first that I can remember.... Cannibal Holocaust. Only the trolls should watch this one. Hard to stomach italian cannibal film that has some real animal death scenes and the first Film inside film concept. No one here was truly original besides this film, to my knowledge. This film is hard to watch... I will not own it.
Page: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 126 >>