Looking at the Box Office numbers, Abrams' money has been well-invested. In its first weekend, Cloverfield shot to the top of any January release by raking in more than $40 million. This BO accomplishment comes on the heels of horrific reviews from NYTimes, Variety and a sleuth of other film critique publications. It seems Cloverfield's main premise of a fake documentary of a monster laying waste to Manhattan has hit the cords with entertainment-seeking movie-goers. I don't blame them. Cloverfield manages to be quite horrifying while being funny at the same time, given the fact that it's a monster film at heart.The hand-held camera obviously contributes a lot to the horror, as the viewer's vision is shaky, limited and grainy, ensuring complete immersion in the action. One of the best scenes of the film is when the group is attacked by the smaller ilk of the monster in the subway tunnels. It truly is a sequence of amazing power because it seems so natural, so real. You almost believe these people are run over by aliens; that is until the cameraman starts blaring out another round of stupid remarks. That brings me to the screenwriting, which is good on average, except for these rounds of stupid dialogue initiated mostly by the cameraman.
Despite its shortcomings, Cloverfield entertains and satisfies as a monster movie. The hand-held camera, the special effects, and the monster all make this one a crowd-pleaser. Hollywood is of course happy too. This one is nothing special but fun to watch.
No comments:
Post a Comment