Cloverfield

6

shamusolarrySep 7, 2011

Overall, this is a decently enjoyable movie. The biggest problems are the slow start (although it does make the movie more exciting when things do start happening) and the abrupt ending. It is too short, and there is no resolution (not thatOverall, this is a decently enjoyable movie. The biggest problems are the slow start (although it does make the movie more exciting when things do start happening) and the abrupt ending. It is too short, and there is no resolution (not that that's surprising in a JJ Abrams movie). However the action sequences are very well done, and it has a very real feel to it, mostly due to the often-criticized, purposefully shoddy camera work. Also, the easter egg at the end was pretty cool: see if you can catch it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Trev29Apr 2, 2012

I'm not sure how I felt about all the camera work, but I suppose that added to the creativity. I kind of wish I didn't see that big stupid green monster at the end, but it was still dark and scary at times.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

ydnar4Aug 29, 2015

Cloverfield is one of the few found footage films that I can tolerate watching. There is a lot of talent behind this film in Matt Reeves, who went on to direct Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, and JJ Abrams, who is directing the new Star WarsCloverfield is one of the few found footage films that I can tolerate watching. There is a lot of talent behind this film in Matt Reeves, who went on to direct Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, and JJ Abrams, who is directing the new Star Wars movie. Cloverfield is not as scary as I hoped although the acting is better than your average found footage movie, there are some actors that you may recognize from tv or other films like TJ Miller and Lizzy Caplan. This film really falls into a lot of the same problems that other found footage movies have. I really liked the look of the monsters in this film but the reveal was a long time coming.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

TheKavehJApr 4, 2016

Cloverfield has ups, and has downs too. The film has a lot of action involved, and keeps you on the edge of the seat most of the time, but it can be boring, and it can be very long too.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Muskrat147Jul 30, 2016

Though solidly crafted with tense action and an interesting plot, Cloverfield loses many viewers due to the dizzying cinematography, cliched dialogue, and overstuffed CGI.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

akenaton1984Nov 11, 2017

En su momento debió ser innovadoras, pero ya con unos años y este estilo de películas fuera de boga, uno puede llegar a concluir que es muy forzada en el guión y hasta predecible.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

ViniciusBritoJan 11, 2019

While some friends were having fun at a party, Robert Hawkins, the host of the show met his ex-girlfriend, Beth, with another guy, and find out that he still have feelings about her. While doing the party they hear a big burst and the groundWhile some friends were having fun at a party, Robert Hawkins, the host of the show met his ex-girlfriend, Beth, with another guy, and find out that he still have feelings about her. While doing the party they hear a big burst and the ground shaking, trying to find out what that is they face a lot of chaos and confusion in the streets of Manhattan. Directed by Matt Reeves and written by Drew Goddard. The story in this film is really good in the monster aspect to be seen from a perspective of the ordinary people in the city, happening out of nowhere while people, with normal problems, were having fun at home in a normal day, i think that this is one of the biggest attraction in here, together as the fact that, at first, you never get a clean shot of the monster, so you can have an idea of what he can do, but don't know it's phisical aspects, how it's body is formed, but only at first, so the whole narrative of the monsters invasion worked out really fine, how they first emerged, without explanations or any clue of how those things got there, letting it all for our imagination and speculation, just like some characters do, considering what they have choose to motivate the characters to get to point A to B, i found that journey really satisfactory, they were able to go into different situations, face and fight different monsters in interesting circunstances, letting us know more about the monsters so as the whole situation in the city. A thing that i didn't enjoyed in the story was the begin and the whole party thing, the problem with the relationship between Rob and his ex, Beth, for real, i really couldn't care less about any of that, but considering that the point was to, also, make us see that from the perspective of an ordinary person in a regular day, it is ok, but the part of making me care for the characters didn't work out very well, at least not for all of them, maybe one or even two in some moments, but in overall it was weak in this aspect. The characters had some really dumb moments that i couldn't stand, like, if the point of this film was to make we see those things from regular people perspective, why make the main character become Dwayne Johnson, make him be a hero and do crazy stuff to save someone, and also, when the liberty statue's head fall in front of you in middle street, the first thing to do isn't really get into a shop and buy some batteries, that was so whatever, i think that this whole thing about the rescue thing didn't worked out because i didn't bought they relationship for even a second, it was completely placed there and badly developed, and considering that a considerable part of the plot happens because of that it is a problem. Beth tells her what have happened to her five hours before he even got there, and considering the situation that she was for five hours, it is completely nonsense that she could be still alive, and that got me off.
At first, while we are only seeing the monsters by far, it is really nice, because you don't know what is that, what can it do, or what it is like, always seeing among the dust and far away, can only get a little clue about what is that, it is nice, and little by little they show you more and more, maybe it wasn't a good idea tho give a clear shot of them, maybe it would have been more interesting to leave to the imagination, but considering that they did, the visual was cool, but in other hand the cgi was awful, but that is only a problem after they really start showing it completely, because before it was covered well.
The cinematography is nice, i like the idea to put the hand camera in this movie, gives an even better sensation of how it would be like to be there and seeing those things from some distance and only getting glimpses, so in consequence it is a very shaking camera. The shots are very well made, the composotion of the shots, mainly while filming the monsters are nice, almost always covered with dust or among the buildings, it was good, sometimes letting we see something through cloth in shadows or through some lights that makes some really nice shots.
The character are another problem, not really caring about much of them. Lizzy Caplan plays the character with more personality in her, turning out that you will care more with her, for sure, the acting is really nice. Jessica Lucas plays a good friend for Rob, in some moments she works, in others it feels really artificial what she says. T.J. Miller is the one that you probably will hear more the voice, and damn, he is annoying here. Michael Stahl-David is ok in some moments, he try to put the hero on, in some moments he is just annoying, in others he is functional.
Cloverfield is a nice handcam monster movie, the monsters and how the movie work with them are really fun and fine, the story about the people is good in the way that we see the monsters from a comum perspective, but it is bad in what they decide to run them into, it is weak in some ways.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

ErikTheCriticOct 14, 2018

This is a not-so-great found footage monster movie. It does have some scares and cool visuals, but it has some really slow scenes, especially at the start and parts in the middle.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

geewahApr 25, 2021

Comes across as a supernatural Blair Witch Project set in the city but falls rather flat.
There are some good edge of your seat moments and the tempo is high but story is thin and highly predictable.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

RobAndBethHaterJul 11, 2023

Give me more clover and less Rob and Beth, AND NO HUD. Also they all should’ve died well before the end, Beth literally was impaled with rebar and they got in a helicopter crash, very unrealistic for them to survive this. TL:DR I love bigGive me more clover and less Rob and Beth, AND NO HUD. Also they all should’ve died well before the end, Beth literally was impaled with rebar and they got in a helicopter crash, very unrealistic for them to survive this. TL:DR I love big monster, hate Rob and Beth.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

WestSiderJan 23, 2008

Cloverfield has many good elements...but the camera work was not one of them. Perhaps they should have used some conventional angles to move the story along and show some of the bigger events in physical perspective? Also the Cloverfield has many good elements...but the camera work was not one of them. Perhaps they should have used some conventional angles to move the story along and show some of the bigger events in physical perspective? Also the characterization was nil...I agree with the Times review that at a certain point I was rooting for the monster...but that is what you get when you use all of 5-10 minutes to develop the main characters.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

GaryP.Mar 1, 2008

Cloverfield was a big dissapointment for me. The story begins with a farewell party which is extremely dull and gives no insight into the plot. You actually wonder if you came to the correct film. Although it gets much better when the actual Cloverfield was a big dissapointment for me. The story begins with a farewell party which is extremely dull and gives no insight into the plot. You actually wonder if you came to the correct film. Although it gets much better when the actual action seems to start, it is a poorly executed film in my opinion with too much expensive CGI and absolutely no plot. The idea is good, and the camera work would be realistic to that situation but it is extremely hard to follow the action at times, which defeats the point of watching it. It is basically people running around Manhattan manically trying not to get viscerated by the monster whilst giving you a visual assault on the eyes. It is one of those films that you desperately want to find something to get into story wise because it has some obvious quality, but when it ends you realise that there is no story and know less than you did when the film started. There is no beginning or ending and nothing to follow story wise through the film. A good film must convey it's message to the audience. Cloverfield did nothing. I really wanted to the monster to win because it would have seen some action, such is the lack of plot. Visuals: 9 Entertainment: 6 Plot: 2 Value for Money: 3 I would not recommend seeing this. It is destined for the £2.99 bargain bin at Morrisons.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

ChristineM.May 24, 2008

The camera work was very jumpy but that was to be expected. I was very dissapointed that in the end they offered NO explanation as to what happened even after it was obvious they found the video after the fact. It left to uch open to debate The camera work was very jumpy but that was to be expected. I was very dissapointed that in the end they offered NO explanation as to what happened even after it was obvious they found the video after the fact. It left to uch open to debate as far as what actually happened. I feel like watching this was a waste of my time.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

NoahJan 18, 2008

Great monster, but the shaky camera ruined it. I understand that they were trying to make it look like it was shot on someone's home camera, but they couldn't ever keep the camera still for more than 2 seconds. I got motion Great monster, but the shaky camera ruined it. I understand that they were trying to make it look like it was shot on someone's home camera, but they couldn't ever keep the camera still for more than 2 seconds. I got motion sickness and had to spend about half of the movie listening with my eyes closed so that I wouldn't puke.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

MikeS.Jan 19, 2008

If you have to watch this abysmal film...sit in the very back...the constant shaking camera will make you puke...the monster is awesome...I wish it was filmed in an alternative style more complacent with my stomach cause I might have enjoyed If you have to watch this abysmal film...sit in the very back...the constant shaking camera will make you puke...the monster is awesome...I wish it was filmed in an alternative style more complacent with my stomach cause I might have enjoyed it otherwise.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

5

AlbinGFeb 3, 2008

Firstly, Jay G. All the opinions which you dismissed had perfectly valid complaints. Just because it is handcam doesn't mean continuity can be cast aside. And The Blair Witch Godzilla aproject is a very good description of this movie. Firstly, Jay G. All the opinions which you dismissed had perfectly valid complaints. Just because it is handcam doesn't mean continuity can be cast aside. And The Blair Witch Godzilla aproject is a very good description of this movie. Home made feel footage but with a monster terrorizing a city. And the fact that you have dismissed all their opinions and pronounced that they can't be critics since they don't agree with you is just absurd. Now. I knew what this movie would entail before i got there. Hand held cam style footage of a group of people in the aftermath of a city destroyed bya monster. And i got just that. But it wasn't at all entertaining. Firstly, the only reason the story continued was one guys illogical and unreasonable need to go BACK into the city. I wonder how this will turn out? Couldn't they have stuck with a survival theme? Running from the monster to get out of the city? Instead the monster turns into a foot note in the plot. The camera work was bad. That is all i can say. Just because it's a handycam doesn't mean it can't be pointed at interesting things now and then. Unless one of the miriad plot points that were neglected explanation was that the camera man has a foot fetish. I lost count of the number of times we catch a glimpse of the monster only to have the camera pan and leave it hovering just off screen. Why is the guy carrying the camera to document this stuff if all he films is being scrambling down a roof? Just simple changes like having him pause to let others by and taking that time to record the monster doing something. ANYTHING. The jarring quality of the footage sent 2 of my mates out due to motion sickness. The shacky-cam gimmick became tedious and unnecessary after 10 minutes. The overly long intro did nothing to convince me of the important relationship around which the movie subsequently revolves. I honestly didn't care whether they achieved their goal or not. Nothing is ever answered about the monster. There were some positives. A few good scenes in the streets where we get to see that the monster is nearby and a genuine threat. Only then did i feel an urgency about their running. I can't get scared if i don't know what is happening. It showed that frantic shacky cam can work in short bursts, but not for a whole film. A better choice would have been either a first person perspective, seeing what they see, or film by a news crew, getting both the panic and realism whilst still SEEING enough to feel involved. If you have a phobia of shoes or pavements, you'll be scared out of your seat.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

PaulJ.Feb 4, 2008

I thought it was ok although I got a bit seasick from the shaky camera. If they had a bigger budget perhaps they could afford a new tripod that has steady legs.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

MarkDJun 9, 2008

I can just imagine the discussions between the writers and producers while making this film. ""This film's got no plot, shallow characters and is completly lacking in any original ideas or emotional content. What can we do?"" ""I know I can just imagine the discussions between the writers and producers while making this film. ""This film's got no plot, shallow characters and is completly lacking in any original ideas or emotional content. What can we do?"" ""I know why don't we film it in a camcorder style. That should cover up all the shortcomings and fool the reviewers into thinking we're making somthing clever and revolutionary. Well it worked for Blair Which.""… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

SMcJul 21, 2008

Biggest pile of shit in my life, got to the point where it could have been a 7/10 then just falls over and dies.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

5

JCJan 21, 2008

Plot was horrible. Who would go back into a city with an undefeatable monster to save someone. Action was pretty good, but the camera sucked. This movie had way too much hype. The first 30 min at the party were absolutely terrible. I Plot was horrible. Who would go back into a city with an undefeatable monster to save someone. Action was pretty good, but the camera sucked. This movie had way too much hype. The first 30 min at the party were absolutely terrible. I don't recommend seeing this movie… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

BobbyEJan 23, 2008

Interesting idea to have the whole movie from a camcorder point of view buts thats about it. Entertaining but only for a see it one time type of flick. I wouldn't recommend this to anyone who is trying to watch a good movie or anyone Interesting idea to have the whole movie from a camcorder point of view buts thats about it. Entertaining but only for a see it one time type of flick. I wouldn't recommend this to anyone who is trying to watch a good movie or anyone trying to watch a scary movie because it falls short in both of those categories. At the end of the day, if your just trying to pass time its not a bad idea to go ahead and watch this movie but don't be upset if you are happy at the end because it will not meet high expectations which this movie had for some reason.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

SeanC.Mar 31, 2008

Pretty cool idea but the camera style is annoying. Two reasons for that is it creates a false sense of action especially when no real plot development is evident. The second reason, the movie made half the theatre so sick they couldn't Pretty cool idea but the camera style is annoying. Two reasons for that is it creates a false sense of action especially when no real plot development is evident. The second reason, the movie made half the theatre so sick they couldn't even watch most of the film. Not so cool when you pay 9 bucks for a film. The sequel, which is already in development, better not be anything like the camera style in the first one.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

MarcusJan 21, 2008

This movie was a bust, over hyped the camera work was very bad. The monster looked kool but the story and direction of this movie was very bad. The only people that will like this movie are people who like weird dumbass movies....

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

MattRJan 22, 2008

I had high expectations and..... By far the biggest disappointment in a long time. Story was corny, not in depth at all. Just overall a huge disappointment. IF you see this movie wait till its on vidoe ot at the cheap theater. If you wait I had high expectations and..... By far the biggest disappointment in a long time. Story was corny, not in depth at all. Just overall a huge disappointment. IF you see this movie wait till its on vidoe ot at the cheap theater. If you wait for video you wont get as bad a headache watching it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

TimC.May 22, 2008

The concept was good, however, the first 15 minutes was very annoying and there was no shock value in the film at all ... meaning that every event could be seen from miles away by anyone with a brain stem. The last 20 minutes was passable The concept was good, however, the first 15 minutes was very annoying and there was no shock value in the film at all ... meaning that every event could be seen from miles away by anyone with a brain stem. The last 20 minutes was passable and even cool but all in all the mixture of Blair Witch / Godzilla and 9-11 was unimpressive and did not bring the concept justice. I don't quite think it was a waste of time but I'm glad I only payed $1.08 to see it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

HughM.Jul 17, 2008

Wow, I LOVE reading all the comments on this movie. People, it's make believe! Don't take it so seriously! I've seen plenty better, but also a lot worse movies this year. It's ok, acting is fine, special effects are Wow, I LOVE reading all the comments on this movie. People, it's make believe! Don't take it so seriously! I've seen plenty better, but also a lot worse movies this year. It's ok, acting is fine, special effects are really good, story line is so-so. Camera work grates at times, but is central to the story. Makes an alright dvd night in.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

DaveM.Nov 28, 2009

Cloverfield is a Blair Witch version of a monster flick featuring a very silly looking monster. The viral marketing campaign was far more clever than the movie itself. Enough with these shaky-cam films already!

0 of 1 users found this helpful

5

tonyGreenJun 25, 2011

This JJ Abrams directed sci-fi / disaster movie has an interesting bent: the film is wrapped within the context of the a top-secret federal body reviewing hand-held documentary evidence - the body of the film. As such the medium itselfThis JJ Abrams directed sci-fi / disaster movie has an interesting bent: the film is wrapped within the context of the a top-secret federal body reviewing hand-held documentary evidence - the body of the film. As such the medium itself becomes a plot device. Through the narrow shaky lens of a handycam horrors are half glimpsed, footage cuts out, it feels quite real. Unfortunately I could not feel for the central characters - annoying mid / late 20's New Yorkers with *sigh* relationship problems. And bad taste in music. Things get hairy - it's all just sturm und drang from there on - I assume - I could not be bothered with the end. A bit weak… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

kronMar 19, 2011

Clover field is what I call ok and boring. Its cliched and not that scary I mean the first 30 minutes of the movie was just love and drama. Although It does borrow some scary elements like not showing the monster it doesn't work. Rather thanClover field is what I call ok and boring. Its cliched and not that scary I mean the first 30 minutes of the movie was just love and drama. Although It does borrow some scary elements like not showing the monster it doesn't work. Rather than being creepy its annoying.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

5

grandpajoe6191Sep 17, 2011

I admit the movie was a crazy, thrilling ride. However, just because "Cloverfield" was filmed in first person perspective doesn't mean it is a good movie.

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

5

TyranianJun 3, 2019

Good for a found-footage film but absolutely unbelievable in several respects.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

RikiegeJan 12, 2013

No surprise in this film that is not a masterpiece.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

Kitkatkatie360Jul 10, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Cloverfield wasn't a bad movie, but I wasn't head over heels in love with it either. The action and special effects were very good. I thought the monster and its little "Parasites" looked very realistic. The bombing sequences were captured very nicely. The movie was very suspenseful throughout. I loved how they captured it with the video camera. I've seen that aspect used in a similar sci-fi film "Chronicle". The plot was very unique for a sci-fi/thriller.
The bad points were that there was absolutely no character development what so ever. I couldn't relate or get attached to these characters lives and what they were going through. I think they could have done a better job when it came to showing more of the characters back stories and what they had to lose.
Another bad point was that it was very predictable. I think most people could predict that everyone would die in the end. It was overall a decent sci-fi/thriller. It may seem boring at the very beginning, but if you watch it until the end, I think you'll be satisfied.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

bfoore90Jun 19, 2016

Basically an updated version of "The Blair Witch Project" with a giant monster attacking New York City instead of a mysterious ghost attacking kids in the woods. While it does provide you with some suspense and jumps here and there, itsBasically an updated version of "The Blair Witch Project" with a giant monster attacking New York City instead of a mysterious ghost attacking kids in the woods. While it does provide you with some suspense and jumps here and there, its almost immediately undone by the lack of meaningful plot with so much shaky cam you'll be sick with a headache by the end of the film. The monster was cool, however but like I said theres no backstory on where the monster came from, how it got there why its there and what the monster even is or if it got defeated in the end. The monster is literally just there, like a giant plot device.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

CrisL.May 25, 2008

Visual affects brilliant although the story was very ordinary ,Left in suspense through the film and it just cut off with no ending. The first person's view I did not like.I walked away feeling "what a wast of my time".

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

JimC.Feb 3, 2008

There was bad acting and the camera work was terrible. It got annoying after a while, but overall it was okay I guess. I liked the statue of liberty head flying off.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

TimWFeb 4, 2008

Cloverfield was not a great movie. I was told there would be scares and jump-out-of-your-seat moments. I didn't jump once. Also, I found the characters unengaging. The party scene at the beginning was way too long and dull, populated as Cloverfield was not a great movie. I was told there would be scares and jump-out-of-your-seat moments. I didn't jump once. Also, I found the characters unengaging. The party scene at the beginning was way too long and dull, populated as it was by cardboard characters.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

BenC.Nov 10, 2008

Suspenseful, but not enjoyable. Clover itself is a pretty poor monster compared to say, some of the Godzilla movie monsters.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

ChadS.Jan 19, 2008

"Cloverfield" is a retarded art film. To put this ambitious gambit of a movie in perspective, you need to be a movie buff; not a snob(who only watches art-house fare); or a fanboy(who only watches mainstream junk); but rather somebody who "Cloverfield" is a retarded art film. To put this ambitious gambit of a movie in perspective, you need to be a movie buff; not a snob(who only watches art-house fare); or a fanboy(who only watches mainstream junk); but rather somebody who has seen it all. And let me tell you: I've seen it all, and "Cloverfield" is something new. It's like watching "Godzilla" directed by Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne("Rosetta", "L'Enfant"); an event film that eschews Hollywood convention for avant-garde disconformity, most notably, the emphasization of form over content. "Cloverfield" is a film you want to cheer for because it brazenly invites audience polarization. We haven't seen a film in wide-release so willing to simulate an amateurish shooting style since "The Blair Witch Project". What "Cloverfield" lacks, however, are characters who act like people(the versimilitude of Heather Donahue's performance in the Eduardo Sanchez & Daniel Myrick film made the Sundance fave from 1999, an artistic and financial success). Paper-thin characters hamper this film's attempt to conjure up the 9/11 tragedy from a you-are-there perspective. We can take only so much of, "Oh, my God! Oh, my God!"… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

ThekgvJan 31, 2008

I went with 3 friends to this movie expecting to either love it or hate it, and instead came out of the theatre feeling underwhelmed by the experience. This feeling was also shared by my friends as well. Now before you decide to classify us I went with 3 friends to this movie expecting to either love it or hate it, and instead came out of the theatre feeling underwhelmed by the experience. This feeling was also shared by my friends as well. Now before you decide to classify us as 1) uncultured philistines (because we don't love the movie) or 2) Sundance Diretor wannabes (because we do love the movie) I should let you know that as a group, we have seen movie of all genres and have had dissenting opinions of movies, so we aren't clones and individually we do have different tastes in movies. All 4 of us felt that the camcorder thing was way overdone (maybe a little more steadiness?) and none of the 5 w's regarding the monster were answered (even if they had answered three of the five w's it would have satisfied us).… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

PaulW.Apr 6, 2008

What could have been a great contribution to the film's genre, is frankly wasted almost right from the start. Once again (like in War of the Worlds) some ill conceived group of people, who are so unlikable, air-headed and preposterously What could have been a great contribution to the film's genre, is frankly wasted almost right from the start. Once again (like in War of the Worlds) some ill conceived group of people, who are so unlikable, air-headed and preposterously good looking, you could swear they were from another movie, is thrown at the audience as if to say: 'Hi folks, these are your protagonists for this evening's entertainment. We apologize for any inconvenience.' Why do we once again have to suffer through the most impressive collection of jawdroppingly dumb yuppies, whose existence somehow seems to revolve around spewing the most vapid conversation around like if it was a sport. Cloverfield has some very impressive and convincing CGI, but when are we finally going to get treated to this art-form in a movie together with a great story and on par dialog? Transformers, another CGI wonder, was nearly unwatchable for the exact same reason. I realize that it's a cliché when I say that this movie could and should have been SO much better. Not in gritty realism, it covers that bit quite well (although I would have preferred some sort of mix of steady-cam and not-steady-cam footage, but rather through a decent plot, a decent (and relevant) build-up and a feasible script.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

ChrisJan 25, 2010

To summarise the movie in one sentence: Godzilla, but without any closure. Slightly longer review would be that it has its moments; there are a fair few exciting parts which I think were done well and the acting overall was quite good, To summarise the movie in one sentence: Godzilla, but without any closure. Slightly longer review would be that it has its moments; there are a fair few exciting parts which I think were done well and the acting overall was quite good, however it has more cons than pros. As much as people like the camera work, it really does get annoying after a while. Even if it is "more realistic", we don't necessarily want realism the entire time (hence why we're watching a film about a big alien invading NYC (on that note, why is it ALWAYS NYC?)), and it just gets really annoying having to look at the floor for 20% of the film. So, camera work aside, the film essentially has the exact same plot as Godzilla so it gets no marks for originality there. Still working with the Godzilla comparison though, Godzilla had a better ending at least: Cloverfield just tails off.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

CarrieJan 19, 2008

If you do not get motion sickness easily, this is the movie for you. My friend and I had to not watch half of the movie because we felt sick to our stomache. The monster is like a half whale half godzilla, and the special effetcs are great, If you do not get motion sickness easily, this is the movie for you. My friend and I had to not watch half of the movie because we felt sick to our stomache. The monster is like a half whale half godzilla, and the special effetcs are great, just bring a puke bag with you incase… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

66GoatApr 27, 2008

If you watch the special features on the DVD you will appreciate the tremendous effort that went into this film. They really wanted it to be something special. And it was except for the camerawork. Such a shame. In their zeal to make it If you watch the special features on the DVD you will appreciate the tremendous effort that went into this film. They really wanted it to be something special. And it was except for the camerawork. Such a shame. In their zeal to make it realistic, the audience is subjected to near torture. Most of the time the action is at a 45 degree angle. If they wanted to make it that realistic, why not just have the hero drop the camera and show a curb for an hour? Makes about as much sense. This would have been a 10 if only they showed a bit of amatuerish camerawork to give the idea, they film it more or less normally.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

TiagoM.Jun 26, 2008

The idea is look realistic, very realistic. But the action and the caracters are unreal. Very unreal.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

JawsLaxerDramaDec 27, 2012

While there is a good premise, and although I do understand the reason why they shot the film the way they did - all in all, this is at best, a late-night movie and not a grand cinematic experience what could expect. Diagnosis: You're notWhile there is a good premise, and although I do understand the reason why they shot the film the way they did - all in all, this is at best, a late-night movie and not a grand cinematic experience what could expect. Diagnosis: You're not missing much if you pass it, and you might like it. The effects are terrific!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

acaiberryMar 19, 2015

The idea for this movie is intriguing but man this movie is going to receive a poor score for me.
I'm not even going to go into music man but if there was a musical aspect that I'd like to fix it'd be the damn antagonist. Boring, unoriginal,The idea for this movie is intriguing but man this movie is going to receive a poor score for me.
I'm not even going to go into music man but if there was a musical aspect that I'd like to fix it'd be the damn antagonist. Boring, unoriginal, can we try again??

Like I said, this movie has an intriguing way of making it all from the viewpoint of a camcorder but sigh...for all my motion sickness friends, you're going to wonder who picked this movie and how you can get them back.

Look, you'll be entertained and interested bits and pieces throughout the film, but I promise there is nothing that makes you go "OH wow I appreciate that". They even cut off alot of the interesting parts. Like how are you going to do that to me JJ Abrams (producer)?? Im watching you really hard for Star wars 7.

I always see if they did their homework on background/setting/historical context. and yeah it was cool seeing New York again but how many times do we want to see the same things over and over again in a monster film. Anyway, this review is to tell you the truth so if you want to watch a movie just like this, go on ahead and skip this to check out "I Am Legend" featuring Will Smith.

Word to describe this movie: Despair. You're sitting there more figuring out what is going on and trying to find a reason to enjoy the movie..but you cant, it's a trap.

Dont watch this alone because you'll end up feeling really guilty and have no one to share the pain with. If you do watch this with friends, get another movie when renting/streaming this ready. Recommend this to anyone to end friendships. I'm also willing to fight anyone who gives this a rating above 7… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

MonkiReviewsJul 10, 2017

A story that felt very empty. The whole movie was people running around New York. I only cared for the guy behind the camera. It didn't have a real story either. You could skip this.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

amheretojudgeOct 16, 2018

a hectic subway ride that lasts for more than an hour..

Cloverfield Reeves's field of horror is so fixated on the crisp of the thrills, that it fails to stand on its structure let along impute a heat on the soul. It is as cold as the worlda hectic subway ride that lasts for more than an hour..

Cloverfield

Reeves's field of horror is so fixated on the crisp of the thrills, that it fails to stand on its structure let along impute a heat on the soul. It is as cold as the world depicted in here, it is basically a razzle dazzle that usual alien invaded tale follows. The only thing it has draw in its viewers is through its perspective which unfortunately is exciting in its initial stage but grows questionable as it ages on screen. The camera work keeps us so busy that you are always attentive towards it, which unfortunately wears down quickly and is then just a hectic subway ride that lasts for more than an hour; you might leave the screen with a headache. It is awfully loud and unnecessarily brimmed with explosives that is clearly mind-numbing. The narration is fast and gripping but it certainly isn't layered or thought provoking and takes its genre sci-fi for granted. Forcibly installed humor shucks away the somewhat earned intensity on each step. The entire feature is imbalanced on its self-created ground that it fails to walk on and just ends up fumbling down the road for attaining its moot closure. There isn't much range offered to the actors to flaunt in aptly but it is not that the allotted acts are on the mark by these performers; they need a better boost. Aforementioned, the sound effects are loud and blunt and the visual effects aren't convincing enough to terrify the audience as it was anticipated. Reeves's efforts are clearly visible but it also isn't enough to float this sinking script whose ironically, the strength of the concept itself weighs it down like an anchor. Cloverfield is a wiped out field before it even habitats itself, it only works as a dinner table discussion, clearly not as a major motion picture.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

4

Kdog152Apr 1, 2023

This film is fine, mediocre at worst and it's just a Godzilla rip off. The acting is alright, but the whole camera thing is just a bit odd bc no one would film this kinda stuff, they'd run for their lives screaming. There were also many timesThis film is fine, mediocre at worst and it's just a Godzilla rip off. The acting is alright, but the whole camera thing is just a bit odd bc no one would film this kinda stuff, they'd run for their lives screaming. There were also many times were the camera holder dropped it and he always went back for it. No one would do that, they'd run for their lives. This film just felt cheap.
The end was stupid and very anti- climactic. There were a few cheap moments, but it was fine overall. 4.5/10… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

BBFeb 3, 2008

Awful movie! Luckily it is very short.

1 of 1 users found this helpful

3

BongoMcFluffFeb 7, 2008

When the screen went black and the credits started rolling, the people in the cinema were silent for about 3 seconds and then all started laughing which for me says it all. It was the most ridiculously pointless, awful film I have ever seen When the screen went black and the credits started rolling, the people in the cinema were silent for about 3 seconds and then all started laughing which for me says it all. It was the most ridiculously pointless, awful film I have ever seen with an even worse ending than I Am Legend. I only sat through the pointless and confusing introduction without walking out because I wanted to see the monster. The rest of the story is absolutely ridiculous. There are so many unbelievable ridiculous things like a person surviving being impaled through the chest on a piece of rebar and then a helicopter crash without even a broken bone or life threatening bleeding. The main attraction to seeing the film was at least for me curiosity as to what the monster looks like so take my advice and just find a picture on the internet and save your money for something worth watching. Also if you see it at the cinema, the shaky camera will make you feel sick but the film will bore you to death before that ever happens.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

TomPMar 2, 2008

Cloverfield made no sense to me. There is no plot at all to the story even when the soldiers are involved in the quarantine of personnel because of the

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

AnankeJan 18, 2008

A harsh lesson in bad kaiju. the monster has no motivation, unlike godzilla who only wanted to go to his precious radioactive tower. the humans were vapid and unrealistic. their physical injuries at odds with fight or flight instincts wouldA harsh lesson in bad kaiju. the monster has no motivation, unlike godzilla who only wanted to go to his precious radioactive tower. the humans were vapid and unrealistic. their physical injuries at odds with fight or flight instincts would never have allowed certain survival instincts. all this movie did for me was give me a bad headache, and i went into it so hopeful for amazing thrill ride. this was the ubermeh.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

3

DarrylFJan 19, 2008

Total waste ! so much potential.. I guess I was expecting so much more !

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

MichaelDJan 21, 2008

Seems like a re-hash of several other movies. When it comes down to it; it just isn't that exciting. The movie was hyped way too much. Just OK, wait for DVD.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

TonyLJan 22, 2008

I like the way the monster was presented, but I cared about little else in this film. A film like this only works when you care about one or more of the main actors, I didn't care for any of them. I wanted the monster to eat them all. I like the way the monster was presented, but I cared about little else in this film. A film like this only works when you care about one or more of the main actors, I didn't care for any of them. I wanted the monster to eat them all. Cable only!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

GaborA.Jan 22, 2008

I could forgive the stream of ridiculous coincidences and absurdities that is the plot of this movie and willingly suspend all disbelief if there was a shred of originality to whisk me away. But there isn't. I spent most of the movie I could forgive the stream of ridiculous coincidences and absurdities that is the plot of this movie and willingly suspend all disbelief if there was a shred of originality to whisk me away. But there isn't. I spent most of the movie day dreaming about what I would do if something like this happened in my city. My dream was definitely less cheesy. Alas it hasn't even been that long since we've had a good monster movie. Its called The Host. Rent it. Avoid this.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

JimK.Jan 28, 2008

Yes this film does keep you awake, while waitng to see what this thing is, but in the end its alot of nothing. The acting was annoying, the video camera perspective was played out after about 5 minutes, and i thought the creature was Yes this film does keep you awake, while waitng to see what this thing is, but in the end its alot of nothing. The acting was annoying, the video camera perspective was played out after about 5 minutes, and i thought the creature was anything but original and not scary. I hate that its true after waiting to see this thing, but it did suck.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

SuzanneA.Feb 15, 2008

I would have given Cloverfield a 2 but I gave it a 3 because it was mercifully short. I know in the 21st century we are supposed to be excited about special effects but can we go back to the old days of character development? Horror movies I would have given Cloverfield a 2 but I gave it a 3 because it was mercifully short. I know in the 21st century we are supposed to be excited about special effects but can we go back to the old days of character development? Horror movies are better if we have an inkling of concern about the people we are watching. The director needs to watch Alien or Aliens 2 to see why people were fully vested in Ripley. Just watching an Alien kill people and destroy a city isn't entertaining.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

JoeyDFeb 6, 2008

I didn't like the Blair Witch movie at all but this handheld technique has potential, its just a question of who can utilize it effectively & not go O.T.T (like what happened to 'Bullet time'). JJ couldn't do it, not yet I didn't like the Blair Witch movie at all but this handheld technique has potential, its just a question of who can utilize it effectively & not go O.T.T (like what happened to 'Bullet time'). JJ couldn't do it, not yet anyway. So after watching an awesome trailer I'm sad to say this movie didn't deliver for me.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

FlonkelD.Feb 9, 2008

The entire movie is filmed as if from a hand-held video camera. While the idea is perhaps novel, the execution is very annoying. Double thumbs down from me.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

JoePrinceApr 26, 2008

*Some spoilers... but trust me, you aren't missing much* "Cloverfield" offers no more than its amazing trailer - no more thrills, no more clarification, no more... well, anything. Except the face of the monster, which, because of the *Some spoilers... but trust me, you aren't missing much* "Cloverfield" offers no more than its amazing trailer - no more thrills, no more clarification, no more... well, anything. Except the face of the monster, which, because of the camerawork, isn't clear. What begins as a story that seems decidedly human quickly devolves into cliches (the lost love, the frantic search for lost love, the panicky, bewildered looks of those in danger, the poor decision making skills of self-appointed leaders) that become more tiresome when you realize that The Camera Is Still Rolling; that is, the poor sap who's following his friends around during a rampage is still holding a camera. (This plot hole is remedied in one dumbshit line: "The world will need to know what happened!" or something equally asinine). Drop it and run, pal. Speaking of the camerawork, the POV is interesting for the first twenty minutes, but becomes tedious as the plot and "near escapes" become progressively more preposterous. The principal characters survive multiple attacks: one seems to be impaled (but lives), three are in a helicopter crash - and survive!, and two watch a friend devoured alive... but the monster leaves them alone. All this would be made palpable if the acting was clever, witty, or pulled more than just Acting 101 grab-bag crap, but it doesn't. From the cameraman's incessant "What's going on?! Where's Rob going?!" to the farewells before the ending (which are hilariously awful, cherry-picking from The Blair Witch Project), the actors' "spontaneity" is never fully convincing. This film was a huge letdown.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

ArielG.Apr 4, 2008

As much as I'd like to give this movie a proper review, I had to walk out after 30 minutes. Part of it was because of the nausea-inducing camera work which got me close to throwing up several times, and the other reason was that after As much as I'd like to give this movie a proper review, I had to walk out after 30 minutes. Part of it was because of the nausea-inducing camera work which got me close to throwing up several times, and the other reason was that after half an hour, there was no plot, no story arc or character development. I give it 3 points for the clever marketing campaign, which tricked a lot of people (including myself) to give their hard-earned money to watch this movie, only to leave the theatres nauseous and disappointed.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

TimT.Jan 18, 2008

I thought the special effeects were excellent, but i didn' like how the storyline was or the ending. I also did not like that the movie was a video cam and even the people behind me said it made them dizzy.

3 of 4 users found this helpful

3

BruceCJan 21, 2008

I'd heard that this movie was a kind of "Godzilla meets Blair Witch Project". The movie is essentially a typical monster movie, but with all the action shot 'live' on a handheld cam-corder. It sounded like a new take on an old I'd heard that this movie was a kind of "Godzilla meets Blair Witch Project". The movie is essentially a typical monster movie, but with all the action shot 'live' on a handheld cam-corder. It sounded like a new take on an old idea, but I found the idea was taken way, way too far. The camera gets waved around so much that it's often hard to tell what the hell is going on. I suppose that's the effect the director was trying to achieve, but he overdid it by an order of magnitude! The idea would have worked much better if the camera had at least been held still, instead of looking like the film was taken by a spastic monkey. I would have given this movie a B- or C+, but the crappy, jittery handcam filming was horrible and brings the movie down a couple of notches. Ugh. Don't waste $10 to watch this in a theatre - or even $5 for a rental from Blockbuster!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

HaxwellJan 22, 2008

This movie could have been so much better. Besides the fact they wasted 20+ minutes at the beginning with that stupid party, Hud and his inane remarks made me want to blow popcorn chunks each time he said something.. The characters were not This movie could have been so much better. Besides the fact they wasted 20+ minutes at the beginning with that stupid party, Hud and his inane remarks made me want to blow popcorn chunks each time he said something.. The characters were not believable, unrealistic turns of events, it just could have been so much better. I recommend anybody who ever has the feeling they could be doing something else while watching TV, not go and see this movie. Save your ends.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

JohnAJan 22, 2008

Lousy!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

MarcusG.Jan 22, 2008

It's almost tragic that this film is so half-baked. The shaky, first-person perspective gave me a very rare feeling of fear and helplessness. This was entirely overshadowed by the film's ability to nauseate, as well as a very weak, It's almost tragic that this film is so half-baked. The shaky, first-person perspective gave me a very rare feeling of fear and helplessness. This was entirely overshadowed by the film's ability to nauseate, as well as a very weak, overused plot. Factor in many obvious errors in logic and continuity and you have a very disappointing film that is only thriving on excellent marketing and hype.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

AdamD.Jan 26, 2008

was an epic failure, gets more than a 0 because the visual and sound was good, and the camera work was very interesting, but the rest of the movie is an F-.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

FamousdogSep 9, 2010

Well executed, entertaining stuff, but did we REALLY need this to be set in New York? The whole film seems designed to cynically exploit the relatively fresh memories of Sept 11th. The film loses several points for feeling like beingWell executed, entertaining stuff, but did we REALLY need this to be set in New York? The whole film seems designed to cynically exploit the relatively fresh memories of Sept 11th. The film loses several points for feeling like being repeatedly whacked over the head with a copy of the 9/11 Commission Report...… Expand

1 of 8 users found this helpful17

All this user's reviews

3

noobrJul 17, 2011

lack of empathy for the characters, lame plot and a failure to make the viewer suspend their disbelief amounts to a pretty poor film. Concept is good but falls short by a long way.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

3

DodgerApr 29, 2012

A poor movie. Some interesting ideas mostly in the form of the recording angle as its supposedly recorded on a handheld camera, personally i didn't think this worked at all though as i found it made it more confusing and didn't draw me in.A poor movie. Some interesting ideas mostly in the form of the recording angle as its supposedly recorded on a handheld camera, personally i didn't think this worked at all though as i found it made it more confusing and didn't draw me in. As most people have stated the ending was awful, one of the worst i have ever seen to the extent that i stood up at the end of the and shouted at the screen. I would recommend that nobody see this movie.... ever.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

crazyc9Mar 21, 2013

This movie was great, but, apparently the director had to go and make it end like all of the other FREAKING HORROR MOVIES. He did that at the worst time also, I mean there was a great love story but then BOOM he goes and ruins it. And theyThis movie was great, but, apparently the director had to go and make it end like all of the other FREAKING HORROR MOVIES. He did that at the worst time also, I mean there was a great love story but then BOOM he goes and ruins it. And they don't even tell you where the creature came from!!!!! All you know is that something is attacking Manhattan and that's IT!! Recommend not watching this movie… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

zNeverSleepingMay 31, 2020

Ainda não entendi muito bem o proposito desde filme.

Os personagens são terríveis; a ligação entre eles mal existe; o plot é fraco e não dá a motivação necessária para o filme; o romance entre o casal não cola e toda a tentativa da edição deAinda não entendi muito bem o proposito desde filme.

Os personagens são terríveis; a ligação entre eles mal existe; o plot é fraco e não dá a motivação necessária para o filme; o romance entre o casal não cola e toda a tentativa da edição de fazer-nos engolir aquilo é no minimo triste; os efeitos especiais não são bons o suficiente para carregar a trama; toda imersão, que a câmera na mão devia causar, não existe; os diálogos são ruins e nem um pouco reais, junto com a reação de cada personagem; os deus ex machina aqui rola solto e nada, absolutamente nada, nos dá um motivo bom pra continuarmos assistindo. Na realidade, porque de tanta gente interessante naquela cidade, o roteiro escolheu justamente eles para que nós os acompanhemos. O que há de especial neles?!

Sendo assim, eu pergunto: qual o ponto?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

Toasty87Jul 12, 2020

With all the hype that was applied it bombed hard with me terrible acting all around.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

AngelaH.Jan 23, 2008

Good idea but god that movie made me SO nauseas... it was shaky and it wouldn't stop moving and it was short. if it has stayed in place it would have worked... not a real story tho...just just goes with its... if u don't get movie Good idea but god that movie made me SO nauseas... it was shaky and it wouldn't stop moving and it was short. if it has stayed in place it would have worked... not a real story tho...just just goes with its... if u don't get movie sick then ya. but don't go for it.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

2

ChrisLJul 11, 2008

Abysmal garbage. Let's see lame Cliffhanger, terrible acting, piss poor plot= FAIL. I must give credit for the cgi effects however. Nevertheless don't throw garbage like this towards us Paramount. You should have learned your Abysmal garbage. Let's see lame Cliffhanger, terrible acting, piss poor plot= FAIL. I must give credit for the cgi effects however. Nevertheless don't throw garbage like this towards us Paramount. You should have learned your lessons from War of the Worlds or any of your other disastrous Sci-fiction/monster releases.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

2

AmbroseJan 17, 2008

I just saw this on opening night, this film is so bad that I am only giving it 2 points, 1 point for actually been made into a film, 1 point for the special effects. During its short 82 minutes, there is probably only 40 minutes of footage I just saw this on opening night, this film is so bad that I am only giving it 2 points, 1 point for actually been made into a film, 1 point for the special effects. During its short 82 minutes, there is probably only 40 minutes of footage that is viewable, the rest of the time is shaking, running, shaking, footage out of focus, shaking, screaming, footage too focused and more shaking, I know its the style, but I personally hate films like that, god forbid blair witch, it makes the movie experience feel cheap and unworthy. I wont recommend this movie, I wont recommend this DVD when it comes out or using this DVD as cup coaster, well maybe as a coaster.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful

2

ScottHJan 20, 2008

The idea of the movie was decent but the camera work was so bad it pretty much made it impossible to watch. The special effects were ok, but limited. The action was there throughout the movie, but it was really lame. I didn

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JasmineP.Jan 22, 2008

When I watched the movie the other day, I couldn't believe that the whole movie was through a camera. The movie was a mix between the Blair Witch Project and Godzilla. This is one movie that I actually called, emailed, and spoke to When I watched the movie the other day, I couldn't believe that the whole movie was through a camera. The movie was a mix between the Blair Witch Project and Godzilla. This is one movie that I actually called, emailed, and spoke to co-workers and family/friends and told them to not even waste their money on. The ending of the movie was pointless. Pointless to the point on why the Camera was needed. Sometimes when I leave a theater, I hear people talking or something, NO. everyone left in COMPLETE SILENCE!!! And lookin @ the Box Office reviews, I cant believe, that this movie grossed $41M . I know there are A LOT of disappointed moviegoers...… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

2

MaximumR.Feb 9, 2008

At the movie theaters, I paid 8 dollars to see the movie. I had a bucket of popcorn, candy, and a smoothie. But even with all of that, the movie was horrible and i left halfway through the movie.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JeffR.Apr 19, 2008

movie was good, if i could see it. good plot good action, good effects. Thank god Transformers was not shot like clover.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JoeT.May 31, 2008

Movie sucked. blair witch camera work. story starts and ends giving you absolutely no information on whats going on.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

IanMJun 16, 2008

I am littering this with [***SPOILERS***]spoiler alerts so don

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

NKJan 18, 2008

This movie tries so hard to be cool and gritty and different but fails on all but one of those goals. Gritty is about the only compliment it gets, if you can call grainy footage and cameras that shake epileptically "gritty". The introduction This movie tries so hard to be cool and gritty and different but fails on all but one of those goals. Gritty is about the only compliment it gets, if you can call grainy footage and cameras that shake epileptically "gritty". The introduction to characters drags, the action sequences are unsatisfying and the ending is a complete dud. And be warned: if watching the "Handycam-esque" style of Blair Witch Project made you feel a little queasy, Cloverfield will have you reaching for, and filling, the bucket. Blurgh!… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

2

JasonMJan 19, 2008

I pray to god that this style of filmaking dies with this film. I did not pay $7 to watch a guy run around with a handheld video camera. If Blair Witch meets Godzilla meets You Tube is your thing, then this movie is for you.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

MichaelR.Jan 19, 2008

For the first time in my life I emailed all my friends to warn them about how bad this movie is and the critics are dead wrong. This is complete garbage and other review have really nailed down why. Something else I didn't like was if For the first time in my life I emailed all my friends to warn them about how bad this movie is and the critics are dead wrong. This is complete garbage and other review have really nailed down why. Something else I didn't like was if you are going to do a guerilla type movie the story should line should really try to pass this as "it really happened" type feel or else the audience will be confused and angered like I was. The movie ends "My name is Rob Anderson and if you are watching this, you know more about this than I do". No Rob, actually I don't...because no monster ever attacked NY and we haven't invented time travel so there is no way this video could have come from the future. All I know is I just dumped $15 on your crap piece of film. Thanks JJ Abrams… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

2

AnonymousJan 22, 2008

The trailer tells the entire story - with very little else to learn. I found this film to be a complete rip off. I wanted to love it however I left unfulfilled. If you like "Blair Witch" then you will like this film.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

HerbieHuskerFeb 19, 2008

Original concept, but I was feeling sick by the end.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

BenSApr 21, 2008

Mark this movie as another overrated waste of time. The monster-fish-dinosaur, or whatever you want to call it, was weakly portrayed. I think a 3rd grader drew the sketches for this one, I mean the thing was shooting fireballs! How un-scary Mark this movie as another overrated waste of time. The monster-fish-dinosaur, or whatever you want to call it, was weakly portrayed. I think a 3rd grader drew the sketches for this one, I mean the thing was shooting fireballs! How un-scary is that?! And the spoider things were random with no connection to anything. They just magically appeared. This was just another teen, wannna be horror movie. I… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

KatGimJun 6, 2008

This movie was pretty good. Except the on going moving and turning, etc. I wish the camera would have been normal instead of someone always moving the camera and filming it. The action was good but the story didn't really make sense at This movie was pretty good. Except the on going moving and turning, etc. I wish the camera would have been normal instead of someone always moving the camera and filming it. The action was good but the story didn't really make sense at all. There was a lot of pointless scenes and disturbing scenes. When some actors got hurt they didn't even act hurt, so not so good acting. But other then that the movie was okay. I hated the filming and some acting but everything else was okay. Nice imagination.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

ParkerA.Jul 6, 2008

As unintelligent and ineffective as the characters: The Blair Witch Project meets Godzilla and I couldn't even connect with the monster. Thank god for fast forward.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

PhilS.Nov 29, 2008

Just watching the movie gave me a real headache. The whole idea of running around with a video cam is crap. Your visual field is greatly diminished and the movement too vivid. The acting was OK I guess, except for the guy behind the cam. His Just watching the movie gave me a real headache. The whole idea of running around with a video cam is crap. Your visual field is greatly diminished and the movement too vivid. The acting was OK I guess, except for the guy behind the cam. His over-acting just added to the discreditably and his character is annoying. The special effects is good - the only reason I gave it a 2.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

SamR.Jan 18, 2008

The camera perspective is from a handheld camera and its like watchin a 2 hour blare-witch project. Watching the 2 minute preveiw is probably more interesting than the movie. Don't waste ur m$n$y

1 of 1 users found this helpful

2

bcJan 21, 2008

While concept seems original, it is just a poorly veiled mask for Godzilla on You Tube meets 9/11 footage. No characters to empathize with, poor dialog and poor attempts at emotionally manipulative editing, the film would have been better if While concept seems original, it is just a poorly veiled mask for Godzilla on You Tube meets 9/11 footage. No characters to empathize with, poor dialog and poor attempts at emotionally manipulative editing, the film would have been better if it were made for TV. Rental, maybe? I was sad to see that the monster did not eat or kill all the main characters. The film is getting a 2 for good use of special effects.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

jamessJan 21, 2008

Bad camera work isn't interesting. The story is too "real" so there is no real plot or character development. You don't get any cool info or a good look at the monster and there is no real ending in terms of the big story. The best Bad camera work isn't interesting. The story is too "real" so there is no real plot or character development. You don't get any cool info or a good look at the monster and there is no real ending in terms of the big story. The best this about it is seeing new york torn up but thats about it. Don't believe the hype.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

NickS.Jan 22, 2008

Eye-Candy. Total waste of time. i felt embarrassed for anyone who wasted money on this Blair Witch rip-off. This is a disaster flick where you actually want the characters to die. Acting was very bad. No plot. I hope the do make a sequel so Eye-Candy. Total waste of time. i felt embarrassed for anyone who wasted money on this Blair Witch rip-off. This is a disaster flick where you actually want the characters to die. Acting was very bad. No plot. I hope the do make a sequel so as to explain what the heck actually happened. It would have been a better movie if they found multiple cameras then edited them films into a coherent movie, that would have been much more interesting. I love JJ Abrams work and think his Mission Impossible had been much more a superior movie than the other two. I think Lost is a fantastic show. Matt Reeves is a great director as well. I just think this effort was off the mark from what we are accustomed two from the two. Instead of a well written movie about such a great an event as a monster/alien destroying the city of New York, so soon after what had happened there in the past, we get a bad love story dipped in CGI eye-candy. This movie is not mental juice to feed your brain. It's more like sniffing paint for an hour or so.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

RayY.Jan 23, 2008

I cannot believe that there are so many favorable reviews on this movie ... Here are the facts the movie is 71 Minutes long The monster is in less than 4 minutes of the movie The camera shaking is horrible Nuff said save your money.

1 of 1 users found this helpful

2

R.R.Jan 26, 2008

-First of all, Adam H, that's a pretty harsh criticism to be making of the people that didn't like this movie. I guess if someone didn't enjoy it they need to "grow up" cuz they're nothing but kids. Wow, what an ignorant -First of all, Adam H, that's a pretty harsh criticism to be making of the people that didn't like this movie. I guess if someone didn't enjoy it they need to "grow up" cuz they're nothing but kids. Wow, what an ignorant statement. -And for those who say plot and meaning don't matter, you're absolutely correct, but the problem is this movie did try to have meaning, like with its visual references to Sept 11. So don't tell me meaning's not important in a movie if the very movie you're reviewing tries to be an allegory of major historical events we're ALL familiar with. The problem with Cloverfield was that there was no real REASON why they had these references to 9/11: what point were they trying to make, because, as Wing M pointed out, nothing gets resolved. Were they just showing off with their use of allegory? -Also, I don't care for shaky-camera action as long as it's done artfully and with purpose. In this case it was, but there's such a thing as taking it too far: the director was just showing off by trying to give his movie a distinct visual style (and some scenes were just so obscurely presented), but it's been done before (Bourne Ultimatum, for example). -The characters were hollow and unbelievable. No, I'm not being randomly bias by bashing every aspect of this movie. My proof: what about that Marlena girl who, from the very start of the movie doesn't seem to care for anyone, suddenly gets the bright idea to go along with the group to find the main lead's girlfriend? Yeah, very realistic: I'll just risk my life for people I don't like. -The humour wasn't at all witty, except some people seemed to find the guy who held the camera to be funny because he was so pathetic. Oh, and the first 20 or so minutes were stretched out to tediousness: most of those scenes or dialog wasn't needed, and the attempt at character development fell far short. -This movie doesn't know what kind of movie it wants to be, and trying to bend genres isn't helping them: is it a love story, because it feels too empty to be a love story? Is it a political allegory? Is it a monster movie? Probably, because that's what it ends up being at the end, even though I was looking forward to something deeper. And saying that it's all these things doesn't help because the genres are never explored to their fullest since the movie is so short. -And I went into the theater really wanting to see this movie, having lined up 2 hours beforehand on opening day, so don't tell me I'm bias in any way.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

Cloverfield

User Reviews