Go see it. Five stars. I loved it.
New York gets whacked again, this time by some kind of alien assault. If you remember 9/11, this will look familiar.
The movie gives a picture of what it would look like if open conflict occurred in America. Could happen.
The movie harks back to many classics: Alien, War of the Worlds, Godzilla, Poseidon Adventure, Earthquake, others I haven’t thought of yet. There is definitely an H.P. Lovecraft element to it, as well. In its way it is a cinematic homage to the unhallowed but totally great B-List of Hollywood SF and disaster films.
Hollywood lost a fortune depicting the American Army as a bunch of rapists and war criminals. This movie shows the Army going straight on against some God-awful things from outer space (I suppose), with cold professionalism. The fantasy film is closer to the reality of what the Army does — put its life at risk to kill America’s enemies, whether human or alien.
The (main) monster was cool. Query: If tank main-gun rounds couldn’t put the thing away, maybe it is made of some kind of alien gelatin, like Cthulhu, and the shells just go throught it? Only directorial misstep: showing the monster too clearly. Better to have left it at glimpses.
The movie also has a good depiction of a metrosexual yuppie guy acting like a man amidst danger and destruction, when the chips are down. Nice to see that, too.
This movie says more things about America that are true than most of what is packaged as slice-of-life drama.
I hope it makes a fortune for the people who made it. I am sure it will do a raging business in the Middle East, where the sight of New York being blown-up is a proven crowd-pleaser, and the audiences can cheer for the monsters.
11 thoughts on “Cloverfield”
In line with the Lovecraft source material, I suspect that the monster is multidimensional — that is, the (bulk?) of its weight is being supported in dimensions we cannot access, allowing its otherwise gravitationally impossible body to survive walking on land, let alone explosive ordinance.
Haven’t seen the film yet. Regarding Dan’s clever “physics of superheroes” type explanation, Argentinosaurus was approximately 70 ft tall, 120 ft long and 220,000 lbs ( slightly smaller than a blue whale). How do those dimesions compare to the Cloverfield monster ( which was apparently a lot more robust and spry)?
Zen: I have got to think that the Cloverfield monster, when it was “standing up” was way taller than 70 feet. It was simply not mere fauna. BTW: Go see it!
Dan: I like this rationale. It is indeed HPLish to suggest that the monster is “non-Euclidean” as you propose.
I didn’t know that you were an HP Lovecraft fan…
I was at one time a fanatical HP Lovecraft fan. I even had some stuff published in Crypt of Cthulhu magazine. The idea of piecing together a picture of the events surrounding a monstrous outbreak with a found video camera is just an update of the way the investigators pieced together the events in the Call of Cthulhu. I think HPL would have liked the movie very much.
I was a big HP fan from way back and have some fanzines somewhere in my old bedroom at my parents’ house.
I can’t wait to see this film!
I’ve quoted you and linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms.blogspot.com/2008/01/re-cloverfield.html
the movie was definitely good, original too, still got some unanswered questions though…
“… still got some unanswered questions though …”
That is called: Leaving room for a sequel.
I am waiting for a monster movie where the monster is the same species that destroyed the WTC 6 years ago.
Comments are closed.