The folly of man
I finished watching the new giant monster flick Cloverfield about an hour ago, so my stomach is starting to settle down. I wish I could tell you that the nausea was caused by the relentless suspense, or even by the grisly visual effects, but no. I'm just a victim of hand held camera syndrome.
For those of you who managed to avoid the hype, here are the spoiler-free basics. A bunch of Friends-like New Yorkers get together for a party. During the party a Godzilla-like giant monster attacks the city. We see the events through a Blair Witch Project-like "found videotape" made by one of the partygoers.
The creators wanted to do something to revitalize the city-munching monster genre, and thought that showing you the impact on the ordinary citizens would serve their goals. It is a good thought, and does provide an interesting perspective, but the "fog of war" also limits the information available to the audience, resulting in a somewhat frustrating lack of resolution to the bigger story.
I suppose it could be argued that the characters are the real story here, and that the monster attack is the equivalent of the WWII backdrop to Casablanca. But for that to hold water the audience would need to care about these annoyingly rich and beautiful adolescents, and that never really happened for me. Truthfully, in the gratingly long stage-setting scenes at the beginning I found myself hoping the monster would show up soon to eat some of these insufferable bastards. Fortunately, good things come to those who wait.
However, as much as I would love to write off the film as a disaster, it has its moments. The visuals are pretty good throughout, and the sound work was great. There are also a few bits in the film that are properly sarcastic, such as the scene where the severed head of the Statue of Liberty has come to rest in the street, and is promptly lit up by the flashes of dozens of camera phones. And thankfully, the monster itself is great, a good design executed in a way a guy in a rubber suit could never pull off.
Overall, it's okay. If the creators had resisted the temptation to go with the hand-held camera gimmick, and had made the narrative a bit more expository, it could have been one of the best giant monster films ever made. As it is, I suspect it will be better on DVD; extra features and commentary may stucco some of the gaps in the story, and being able to pause the film while you let your stomach recover from the shaking camera will be a blessing.
8 Comments:
Last night, I wanted to take my son to see Cloverfield or Sweeny Todd. It was sort of a toss up. Marc is "adult" enough to handle ST, but I thought he'd rather see Cloverfield. Then I read some reviews and realized that my motion sickness would likely make the experience ... uh... distasteful. Then Marc surprised me by insisting on Sweeny Todd. So we saw that last night and I'm still thinking about how amazingly well done it was... gushing blood and all! I knew the overall story line, but had never seen any other version. Now I want to see them all!
That's a shame about "Cloverfield". Michelle and I were just on our way out to see the movie, but based on your review, have opted for dinner at Hy Vong instead.
I want to see "Sweeney Todd", but I was under the impression the film only contains a few songs from the score...does anyone know if this is true?
Well, I totally loved Cloverfield. I do agree that the beginning party could have been trimmed by at least a third, but I didn't get affected by the camera motion at all, and I totally bought in to the rest of the show. And I loved the *spoiler* abrupt ending.
I also loved Sweeney Todd. A few songs did get cut and/or trimmed, but most survived.
I admit, Mike, that the shakycam issue is a personal one. I get motion sickness easily, so I may have been harder on the film than it deserved. Even so, I don't think it sucked, just that it contained the seeds of a much better film.
Sweeney Todd, though, kicked Cloverfield's ass eighteen ways to Sunday, and I'm a huge fan of the original musical.
I am also subject to motion sickness so I think this one will have to wait for DVD.
Of course, giant city munching monster movies are always better with inexplicable subtitles of the Japanese. Raymond Burr is a runner up.
A few people stepped out of the theatre, presumably to get over their motion sickness. I shut my eyes every so often but still felt really sick after the movie. Despite that, I enjoyed the movie.
Brother, I'm with you on the shaky cam thing. Same goes for fast-cut editing. I don't get motion sickness, but either technique just annoys the shit out of me. It's fucking lazy, like a stage magician distracting an audience with pyrotechnics rather than skilled sleight of hand.
I didn't have a problem with the shakycam at all and overall I really enjoyed the movie. I agree that the opening party scene really could have been cut down considerably, allowing for more of the "monster in the city" story to unfold. But all-in-all I found it pretty entertaining and liked it a lot.
Post a Comment
<< Home