Cloverfield

It is a blast, but sometimes the excessive effort to push for authenticity at all costs can be bothersome. After all, there are simply moments when even the toughest journalist, reporter or cameraman wouldn’t be able hold the camera and would run to save their own life. So besides the fact that director, Matt Reeves, basically shouts to the world “look how realistically I filmed this” thanks to these scenes, the film does not suffer from any significant shortcomings. The characters behave quite believably, the chaos and confusion are excellently portrayed, and the sense of unpredictability is brilliant. Only the clichéd subplots of the story (except for the rampage of the monster and the rescue of the loved one – as later revealed) get a bit boring, but among all the explosions, shooting, and falling buildings, there is not much time for it anyway. (23/06/2008)

"I'm documenting." I am devastated that Cloverfield is just an average picture. It was a really nice idea (despite being pipped to the post by that Spanish zombie movie - Rec - that I’m intrigued to see). That goes hand in hand with the convincing stylization. I’m not exaggerating when I say that the sound is just perfect. The music composition during the closing credits was just delicious. And lastly the entire movie up to the storming by the army was absolutely gripping. Unfortunately, the creators then ran out of ideas, just recycling those already used, all of a sudden the chosen style no longer has anything to offer and primarily the characters’ reaches the pinnacle of illogicality and starts to be actively annoying. If this were just another classic Godzilla movie, that wouldn’t matter at all, but pseudo-documentaries trying to be “what would happen if" realistic, this is really surprising and ruins the entire concept. And the last five minutes really puts the icing on the cake. Why couldn’t it have finished with that fall? This way, although it has a clean running time of about seventy five minutes, in the end even that is too long. And it’s a huge shame. (27/01/2008)

Cloverfield is an obvious mix of The Blair Witch Project and Godzilla, taking the best and the worst from both of them. The entire film is shot with a handheld camera, so those who hate shaky images need to consider whether they should invest their time in it at all before watching it. The film's running time is perfectly adequate – an hour and a quarter – and I wasn't actually bored, why the 3* then? To be honest, I was a bit more annoyed with our famous "cameraman" who filmed everything, everyone and everywhere, but then again, there would have been nothing to watch. I didn't like the script either, but the look of the monster and the CGI action scenes were excellent. In short, a film that no doubt deserves a large fanbase, but I didn't find my way to it, which in this case is a shame. (01/07/2011)

After watching it a second time several years later, I'm raising my rating because I appreciate above all the fantastic demonstration of the implementation possibilities. Goddard politely circles around genre clichés but manages to profile the protagonists, and Reeves takes the whole thing to a new level with a clever POV, showing only as much of the titular monster as the audience needs, though we’re certainly begging for more. Fantastic special effects and a perfect soundtrack move the film into top form. At a time when polished CGI is the standard, the flying head, the iconic bridge, and the leaning building look like a technical treat from a time yet to come. 4 ½. (07/04/2016)

When original ideas were being distributed, Abrams and his gang were ahead of the game. How else can one explain that a story of a worn-out genre, filmed using a technique proven since the forests of Maryland, can transform into a perfect hit only with the help of a veil of mystery, attracting crowds who gladly devour it? An amazing experience that, with its suggestiveness, didn't let me properly sleep on the day of the screening. (22/02/2008)