thanks for an insightful review of what I also believe will prove to be a landmark film. I saw the film over a week ago now but I’m still thinking about it. I agree with much of what you write and only wish to add yet another area where I believe the film will prove ground breaking.

I feel Cloverfield heralds a new way in which we will “view” entertainment (not just cinema but other media as well) not perhaps as important as the sociopolitical angles you cover but interesting none the less.
The traditional view point of the cinema goer is that of voyeur, in fact directors have occasionally made their characters voyeurs within their own films in parody of this fact (ie. Hitchcocks “Rear Window”, also by the way an early “reality show” but then the master always was ahead of his time!). The recent handheld style camera shooting angles have been an attempt to bring the viewer more personally and intimately involved in the action in a way not previously achieved. Coverfield has been for me by far the most effective effort in this direction so far. A combination perhaps of the very ordinaryness and cluelessness of the cast and a determined effort (apart from in the opening credits) to provide no clues or information about what is truly going on to the viewer, ie. it is possible to believe that you, an ordinary Joe, could be present along side the cast.
With the continued development of virtual reality technology and film techniques demonstrated in Cloverfield, the viewer of the future will be more and more be invited to play a bit part in the adventure he/she is participating in.

Cloverfield also unabashedly taps into deeper fears about the destruction of our civil liberties and constitutional rights in a world now ruled by monstrous “others” in and outside of the country, who are out to destroy us and everything we stand for.

Where does the link between diminishing civil liberties and and a rampaging monster lie? Yes the decapitation of the statue of liberty’s head (perhaps it’s French) is symbolic to some extent. Although not in the sense that we have these scheming, coniving and malevolent politicians (most people think of them as emotionless automatons rather than people). But perhaps challenging the dominance of man. Here we are almost with unbridled arrogance, blotting the land with our own statuesque constructs and suddenly and without warning some thing comes to claim its own patch and nudge mankind out of the way. In our decadence and unchallenged superiority, we’ve become lazy and complacent. Remember what makind has supposedly done to the environment (man made global warming is still a theory). Perhaps this is mother nature’s way of taking us down a few notches.

Regarding interpretation, I think what’s happening is people are associating political allegories to any film. Because people like to have hidden meanings. If they become interested in some thing they want to delve deeper to find and unearth snippets of subtexts. Some times this involves people attaching ridiculous notions to films which never had the intention of presenting such ideas in the first place!

Yes this monster is rampaging through New York like a bulldog on heat but not to control or subjugate us. It doesn’t want to control us through some convoluted plan a la Big Brother. It simply for whatever reason is setting up shop in New York and homosapiens are clearly in its way. Perhaps this film has environmental rather than political connotations?

Another nauseating phenomenon is these ‘liberty’ groups who jabber on and on about how the evil government is taking away our liberties so they can control us. Firstly it is these groups that add to the hysteria and fears by scare mongering. Clearly people who have taken George Orwell’s “1984″ a bit too much to heart. This idea of civil liberties under threat is nothing new. America seems to think terrorism only started in 2001 where as before it was “freedom fighting” (America was founded on an insurgency). Yet the UK had to endure terrorism by the toothless IRA for some decades. Although legislation had been brought in because of their armed campaign, some of which was draconian. Especially measures as internment without trial. It’s also important to note that there were those in the US who actively sponsored the IRA’s ‘fight for freedom’ (which included nailbombing women and children) through fundraisers as NORAID. Now America came under attack and things suddenly change.

One last point on liberty. For those familiar with the film V for Vendetta (which I can’t stand). There’s a line in it taken from Thomas Jefferson I believe; which goes something like “people shouldn’t be afraid of their government, government should be afraid of its people”. All fine and dandy, only problem with that philosophy is it encourages and breeds sychophancy and pandering by vote chasing polictians. Politicians who are too spineless and toothless to make difficult decisions because it’ll cause them to fall out of favour with their electorate.

In a country where we’re now greeted by military recruitment ads before watching a film in our local movie theaters, where the government is allowed to lie our country into war and where your daily news is controlled by powerful corporate interests, what else is there to do but stand by idly and watch?

Can you blame the military for putting up recruiting advertisements every where? Due to the incompetency of the present US administration the US military has become a little over stretched as it has many overseas commitments in Europe, Far East and of course the Middle East. As one former British Army general (Mike Jackson) put it, the ‘leadership’ (oxymoron in this case) shown in the post-war management (another one) and administration of Iraq was “intellectually bankrupt”. Completely bereft of intelligence and thought. Much of the blame must be shouldered by Donald Rumsfeld who clearly had no idea in how to deal with a post-war Iraq, thus resulting in decisions that were completely inane, incompetent and utterly inept. However I’ve gone off track a little. My point being that going to war always lies with the politicians, many of whom have not got an ounce of political nous. It’s always the Military, specifically young men (and women) who have to bear the brunt of their folly.

President Bush’s State of the Union speeches must be downright pornographic

I think that sentiment belongs to hyperbole more than any thing else. Whilst not American I’m no fan of Bush as his tenure has mostly been riddled with incompetence from top to bottom. However his State of the Union speech was nothing more than usual political rhetoric (nothing overly egregious). I’m not doubting his sincerity in wanting to deliver but it does make one question how is he going about doing it. Which makes one hope that come November a Democrat government will be in place and the phrase “change” isn’t just old spin.

Unfortunately he wasn’t taken seriously since Hostel: Part II was merely a “horror” film and even worse, something small-minded critics like to call “torture porn.” In some of the worst and frankly most toxic film criticism I’ve come across in years, critic after critic berated Roth for his attempt to comment on current events using the trappings of a modern horror movie. In the end, their negative criticisms were far more offensive then anything you’ll find in Eli Roth’s movie

Then I’m not going to be popular here in expressing my misgivings about Eli Roth’s two Hostel outings. Whilst I try to avoid snobbery especially with “genre” films I can’t see how he’s trying to explore any social/political occurence by making a horror film where people get butchered and spliced by maniacal and sadistic nutjobs, who like their Black and Decker a bit too much. To me it lacks any sort of intelligence and sincerity in wanting to truly explore these issues. Also in a cynical way I feel that many film makers will claim they are commenting on social undercurrents and that their “art” (egregious use of the term) is meant to be some form of commentary, just to add some legitimacy to it. Rather they are unwilling/unable to craft an intelligent, detailed and nuanced story so they’ll just do another slash and shock film.

I’ll stop short of saying that political subtext and commentary doesn’t belong in horror but I’ll be very skeptical of those that claim so. Apparently Eli Roth made Hostel II in reference to Abu Ghraib..one wonders whether he has been watching Al Jazeera to get his daily current affairs input. I don’t see how a which film depicts violence gratuitously and so amorously can tackle such a subject matter seriously and with the care and craft that is needed? The cold hard truth is he enjoys making schlock horror films, designed to be as gory, shocking and over the top as possible. Which is fine as it’s his business what he does. But when he tries to pass it off as some critical look at the going ons of the CIA, military or whoever then I will raise an eyebrow and scoff.

Having said that Starship Troopers and Robocop are two good examples of horror/action films which are tongue in cheek in parts but also serve as good satire. Robocop on commercialism and the desensitised media coverage. Starship Troopers on the de-humanising aspects of war and the loss of the innocence of youth among other things.

Now you won’t like what I’ve said but it’s only my opinion and one which is just as valid as one that endorses his viewpoint.

eight years of a destructive right-wing presidency have left many Americans feeling utterly powerless

Some thing we agree on. However if your statement was true regarding the electorate feeling “powerless” then how would that explain the record turnout for the recent polls? People are mostly tired of the current administration and want real change instead of empty promises. Luckily the Democrats have two engaging candidates, hopefully one of them will win the race to the White House. Democracy is alive and well because people are clearly voting with their feet and will continue to do so.

Am I injecting logic into a movie where there is none? Probably, but in the final analysis I’m reviewing a GIANT MONSTER MOVIE so logic should take a backseat the minute you buy your movie ticket. In the end, Cloverfield can be enjoyed purely for the crazy ride it takes its audience on.

Agreed. You have to watch with suspension of disbelief as the military unloads every piece of hardware and high explosive ordinance it has into the creature. Understandably with a fast moving creature a lot of shots will miss so much of the destruction will come from the military as well as the creature heh. As long as a film doesn’t claim to be a technical documentary on ‘monster warefare’ (if there ever was such a thing) then minor infringements don’t matter.

The line from Godzilla (1998) (yes I know) always cracks me up :-

“Negative impact that’s the god damn Chrysler building we’re talking about here….what the hell is the matter with you people, you’ve caused more damage than that thing did!”

A sequel seems to be definitely on the cards. I think to exapnd the story a soldier’s view would be interesting. More on a squad/section basis. A character driven piece would be good as long as it doesn’t concentrate too much on the characters and not on what’s going on around them.

Honestly, the handheld camera did bother me. I had to walk out of The Blair Witch Project because of it, and this one sent me to the bathroom to throw up, but I came back. It was just so thrilling that I found a way to manage my nausea. The camera movement was absolutely essential to the realism of the experience these young adults. I think you explained the holes fairly well, too, as not being essential to experience the moments as real ones.

I did not find this group vapid. They seemed very real to me with the types of concerns people their age and socioeconomic group would have. I totally bought the folks using their cellphones to send the head of the Statue of Liberty out into the world. Weren’t cellphones a major part of the information we got about 9/11 (particularly its victims)? These folks were probably victims, too, but they had a new way of documenting their distress and despair. The decapitation of this symbol of liberty definitely made a subliminal statement about the world under the neocons and Bush/Cheney. I know the urge to run away has often been on my mind–just get out of this country or as far away from the centers of power as possible (entertained a job offer in Hawaii, for example).

I think the attacks on the film have more to do with its fairly overt political implications. People in power and among the culture elite of film criticism DO remember what Godzilla represented (including a recreation of an eyewitness of the firebombings in Tokyo–director Honda himself!). The general populace isn’t afraid to confront the criticisms these images suggest. They know the code instinctively. It’s no wonder this film has been an enormous success right out of the blocks. I’d see it again if I weren’t worried getting sick again.

LRobHubbard - Glad you liked my take on it. I tend to prefer old-school monster films myself where drama/characters took a backseat to the action/monsters. I actually think Cloverfield would have been predictable and probably as dull as that awful Godzilla remake if it had spent much time with the characters. And frankly, what kind of character development can you possibly expect from a sci-fi/monster movie that spends only 7 hours in the characters lives?

As for The Host, I actually thought the film was rather overrated and I didn’t find it scary at all. I’m afraid I’ve never had much interest in seeing Miracle Mile. If you want to compare Cloverfield to anything, why not mention the recent Gamera films which Coverfield borrows a bit from? Of course the recent Gamera movies tend to spend too much time on characters/drama in my opinion

I guess it all depends on what you want from an action/monster movie. I like complex drama and character development and that should be obvious to anyone who reads my blog, but I don’t expect it or really want it from an action/monster movie.

Lastly, the film has received an equal amount of negative and positive reviews from critics (not to mention plenty of lukewarm reviews) so I wouldn’t exactly call it “overpraised.”

At this point I think I’ve spent way too much time talking/thinking about this film and I’ve said everything I want to say about it, but thanks to all who have commented. Que sera, sera…

It’s a thrill-ride gimmick film - fun to watch during the duration, but it’s pretty forgettable after the lights come up… Hell, even most monster movies have a little bit of substance to them.

This is being way overpraised, like BLAIR WITCH - it’s merely an OK film, rather than anything classic.

However, I agree 100% that Dorian Gray is a work of art !

Greg - Thanks. I was really just responding to the ridiculous reviews I’ve read by critics who clearly have no love for giant monster movies or have some personal vendetta against the filmmakers, but I’m glad you enjoyed it. As for Hostel II, I have yet to read one smart and effective argument against the film and why it’s as awful as “used toilet paper.” But if you want to point me towards one, I’d be happy to read it. Of course, you should also keep in mind that I think Massimo Dallamono’s Dorian Gray and Honda’s Latitude Zero are works of art.

I thought the movie worked pretty well…

My only “problem” with your take is that Hostel II is worth anything more than used toilet paper.

Easily my least favorite major theatrical release I’ve ever sat through. I wouldn’t see another Roth film if it was being screened across the street and was free…

G

Since you don’t like horror films there is a high probability that you probably won’t enjoy Cloverfield very much so I thought I should warn you to be really cautious about viewing it. If you decide to see it, I’d be curious to hear what you think of it. I also recommend watching some similar films like the Godzilla films, The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms, etc. before Cloverfield so you have some idea of what to expect.

It’s kind of funny, but lots of American science fiction films and pulp novels seem to enjoy using pictures of the Statue of Liberty being destroyed such as Escape from New York. I recently came across this blog post by someone who collected a bunch of images that are similar to the Cloverfield ad campaign here.

I think the Statue of Liberty is a symbol that many American’s hold dear so it’s not really too surprising that filmmakers, writers, artists, etc. feel the urge to use it to represent a of of different ideas.

thank you for this excellent entry, which I took liberty to quote from in my blog. I noticed you’ve tried to have my entry auto-translated, but the output probably didn’t make much sense to you, so I thought I’d stop by and explain it. ;)

I hadn’t planned to see Cloverfield, since I loathe Horror movies. The poster art reminds me of the terrible “Day after Tommorrow” cheesecake, and I’ve asked myself: which filmmaker in their right mind would want their work to be associated with that terrible waste of celluloid?

The whole exploitation discussion hasn’t arrived in Germany yet and neither has the movie, but I’ll go and see it and then come back here and let you know what I thought (if you’re interested, that is).

Cheers,
- Kiki

David - Many thanks for the kind words about my post. I truly appreciate them. I find the critical divide over the film really fascinating and so I had the urge to weigh in and rant a bit after seeing the movie. I’m really fond of horror and science fiction cinema, but both genres often get beaten up by critics. Thanks again!

isn’t every major catastrophe film centered on New York? they take place there because it’s a huge city…

I also noticed that Tim Lucas has suddenly back-pedaled a bit on his previous response to the film and he seems to want to see more “gravitas” or drama related to the death and destruction that takes place in the movie, but I don’t really know what people expect considering the narrative structure and time frame of Cloverfield. It’s a completely different film than Godzilla, even if they share some obvious similarities.

The sound design of Cloverfield was definitely one of the best things about the film. It really was powerful and effective and I do agree that some of that will be lost if you only watch it on DVD at home. I think the film was also helped by the fact that there was no distracting soundtrack playing over every scene. That added to the realism of the movie in my opinion.

Jonathan - I really hope you’ll enjoy it once you see it. I personally went into the film blind besides seeing the web/TV ads and I think that helped add to my enjoyment of it and I don’t know much about J. J. Abrams except he produces one TV show I find interesting (Lost). I also tend to avoid reading a lot of reviews before I see a film because I don’t want other people’s opinions/ideas about a movie clouding my own view of it and going in with expectations can sort of ruin a film for me. Anyway, I really hope your expectations will be met!

Mcbud - David Bordwell (link posted above by Gareth) did a great job of detailing the way Cloverfield uses first-person narrative and documentary style photography. The only time I felt a little “off” was probably when they were climbing up the building towards Beth, but it was nothing more then a few butterflies in my stomach and I’ve experienced much worse when I’m in a boat, on a roller coaster or flying in a plane.

I do think the audience can see Rob change and transform as the film goes along and frankly his character is allowed to develop in ways that you rarely see in any type of horror or sci-fi film these days.

Finally, the “fright” factor is one reason I enjoyed the film so much. Unlike more recent giant monster films like Starship Troopers, etc. Cloverfield doesn’t rely on too much comedy to soften the impact of the film and make its point. It also didn’t go for a warm and fuzzy “feel good” ending like Spielberg’s remake of War of the Worlds did. (Edited to add: I do want to say that I actually enjoyed Spielberg’s War of the World remake even if some aspects of the film and the ending bothered me. I actually thought it was the best thing he’s done since Empire of the Sun)

Speaking of characters, I started the movie out hating them. I remember telling my wife that I couldn’t wait for these vapid and anemic characters to start dying. They were selfish, immature people who led frivolous lives and needed some great catastrophe to help them prioritize their lives and concentrate on what was really important to them. These privileged wastrels were all very different people by the end of the movie. Horror movies (and plenty of other genres) tend to neglect character development for a steady stream of thrills and chills.

The last thing I would like to add is that, yeah, this movie gave me honest to God nightmares. I can’t think of a better recommendation for a horror movie than that.

Thanks for letting me blather.