Calle Cloverfield 10

It would have been solid 8 or 9 if it wasn't for the ending. Except that it was quite an intense mystery.

Belated pseudo-sequel to the divisive 2008 movie Cloverfield. That first film dealt with an unexplained giant monster attack in NYC, and was shot in the "found footage" style: everything shot with a video camera, as if by one of the characters within the film, with all the shakiness and amateurishness one would expect. The idea is to lend the film added verisimilitude and place the viewer within the narrative. This works only occasionally, and in my opinion Cloverfield was one time that it did. However, that being said, this sequel does away with that narrative device, and is shot in a traditional, stationary manner, with known actors and professional cinematography.

The story follows Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), a young woman in an unhappy relationship who packs her bags and hits the road, leaving her boyfriend and driving toward parts unknown. She suffers a terrible car accident, and when she awakens, she's chained up in the underground bomb shelter of the distinctly odd Howard (John Goodman), a conspiracy theorist and survival nut who claims that while Michelle was unconscious, the world up above has come to an end. What caused it, he isn't sure (Russian nukes? Terrorist bio-weapons? Alien invaders?), but he knows it isn't safe to step outside. Also in the shelter is goofy country boy Emmett (John Gallagher Jr.), a former employee of Howard's in the construction of the shelter.

The vast majority of the movie is a slow-burn suspense drama, as Michelle tries to learn more about her surroundings, and the two roommates she's now forced to live with. You know Howard isn't all there, but just how far gone is he? Or are his most outlandish claims only the tip of the iceberg? These scenes are well-done for the most part, and the actors are all good, especially Goodman, who uses his bulk to great advantage. Winstead does great work as well, using her eyes more than anything to project her performance. The problems for me came in the relatively uninspired script. There wasn't really a beat in the film that I didn't see coming, and all of the characters ended up where I expected them to be within the first 10 minutes. The dialogue, too, while showing a tiny bit of wit here and there, didn't hold my attention as well as I hoped. I won't go into the film's last act, only to say that "Cloverfield" is in the title for a reason, but don't expect the giant monster action of the first film. Directorial debut of Dan Trachtenberg. From Paramount.

Pluses: 1. Great cast. Really good chemistry among them. Terrific performances from all. Mary Elizabeth Winstead gets better with every film she makes. 2. Story keeps you guessing until the end. 3. There are references in it to some popular films in the genre (that are likely film maker favorites) from the past 30 years or so. 4. Director shows great promise while still early in his career. 4. Story more important than special effects or pointless action sequences (always a plus for me). 5. Sound effects, usually unappreciated in non-action films, well used to add to the intensity of the drama.

Minuses: 1. We've probably all seen John Goodman play a similar character before. 2. There's a possible murder that took place prior to the film, a plot device never resolved.

Since the film has the word "Cloverfield" in the title, a lot of dim light bulbs thought this was a prequel or sequel to the other film and bad mouthed it because it isn't. Using Cloverfield in the title was likely just another reference to a favorite film.

Some people didn't understand the ending. Huh? They must have fallen asleep during the rest of the movie (when they realized it wasn't Cloverfield 2) or this generation is dumber than I fear it might be. The actions of Winstead's character at the end of the film make perfect sense in light of a monologue she delivered earlier, which apparently was ignored by those whining about the ending.

Don't listen to the naysayers. It isn't high art, but it's an entertaining film that will hold your attention to the end.

To describe 10 Cloverfield Lane in one word: Genreless.

I won't say much about the film as I'm a strong believer of going in blind, but I will say that the performances, writing, and cinematic pacing worked perfectly together to create a truly unique film.

I loved watching it, and the moments of comedy sprouting up throughout made the duality between light-hearted humanity and dark confusion work perfectly together. I would give the Titles and Credits 10/10 as well, because they were just so damn fantastic and fresh and reminded me that titling is an art form like any other in the cinematic Genre. If you enjoy good film, you will enjoy 10 Cloverfield Lane.

I explicitly avoid watching any trailers or reading any reviews from 10 Cloverfield Lane just because I wanted to be certain to be surprised by the story. I just heard from some people that it was good and that's all I needed to know. And I'm glad I did because during the whole entire movie you wonder what is really happening. You think about all the possible scenarios and still you are never sure what is going on. I like those kind of movies, mysteries, that keep you on edge all the time. The cast did a perfect job with their respective performances. And even though there are almost no other actors then the three main ones, John Goodman, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and John Gallagher Jr, the movie never gets boring. It's full of twists and that's how I like it. One of the better ones I saw this year.