Cloverfield

I agree with most of the comments I read, in that this film is definitely worth watching, BUT thought I'd mention a few things that others didn't.

The lack of a steady camera shot, even though it fits well with the plot, began to wear on me. I found myself relieved whenever the camera fell to the ground and gave the same view for a few seconds. It felt like I had on the wrong glasses - I was constantly trying to bring the scenes into focus and the continual motion, coupled with the random focus and quick glimpses of things I wanted to see clearly, made me feel stressed, strained and then annoyed.

Add to that the ending, which leaves so many issues dangling, and, overall, I found it very unsatisfactory.

Despite that I still gave it a 6. If you can handle triple rides on a roller-coaster then you'll probably really enjoy this film. If you get motion sickness easily then you may want to pause it every 10 minutes and focus on the wall!

So, I went to a 5PM showing of Cloverfield today. It was pretty good. I found the characters to be very human and developed quite nicely over the course of the story. The special effects were excellent, with quite a few "oh $#!@" moments.

Be warned: If Blair Witch Project made you nauseous, then I don't recommend Cloverfield. The *entire* movie is filmed in the "handy-cam" style of the trailer - but in my opinion, it works better here than in Blair Witch. It helped draw you into the movie and make you feel like you were in it, and it made the CGI more convincing.

Very intense film.

It was nice to finally watch movie that didn't seem like anything I'd ever seen before. This, much like Spielberg's "War of the Worlds" and "Children of Men", completely immerses you in this incredible situation with absolutely no knowledge to comfort you. It's very disorienting, which adds to the experience; you never figure out what the hell is going on but you're so into survival that you put it past you. You're placed with a bunch of characters whom you get to know and eventually must join in their frenzied search for a friend while being subjected to some horrifying imagery and new threats.

The effects look great and realistic thanks to the hand-held camera, which isn't too bad-looking if you manage to get a seat further from the screen. The filmmakers came up with some really great creature designs that were menacing yet very much original. If you're bound to be upset over seeing a movie with a lack of music, then stay for the credits, during which a fantastic suite of music composed by Michael Giacchino titled "Roar! (Cloverfield Theme)" plays.

All in all, a fantastic time at the movies. A little more background on the monster would be nice, though the absence of this information is intentional. Everyone in the theater was rooting for a sequel; maybe a second set of footage is found elsewhere? Or perhaps there is more the the viral marketing -- what exactly were Slusho and Tagruato? Also be prepared to suspend some disbelief, but considering the movie is about a monster destroying New York City, that shouldn't be too difficult.

I genuinely enjoyed this movie and found its concept to be interesting. However, I do know some other people who have not enjoyed the shaky camera style.

They needed Godzilla to fight that thing, not tanks or missiles!

Jokes apart, it's a well-acted and well-made found footage feature, no doubt whatsoever. However, I remember liking the movie much more when I first saw it in my teenage years. I vividly recall caring for the whole ensemble and the devastating tragedy that struck them out of nowhere.

More than a decade later, I cannot state the same, though. Perhaps it's the overexposure of the found footage genre in general or the fact I've now gotten habituated to such filmmaking and have seen much better works in the process. Whatever the reason, it did not resonate with me on the same level this time; I wish it did.