Movie Review: Cloverfield (2008)

The anticipation is over, and the J.J. Abrams-produced movie Cloverfield is now in theaters. After one of the most impressive marketing campaigns ever performed by a major motion picture studio, expectations were high, the buzz extraordinarily high. Cloverfield was pretty much asking to be a disappointment, but it is not to be.

Cloverfield pretty much kicks ass. The movie is fun, exciting and action-packed, which is more than anyone can ask for. I’ve written a full Cloverfield movie review here.

By Erik Samdahl
Related categories: Movie Reviews
Tags: , , ,


  • Roberto Torres

    Cloverfeild..Very dissapointing in the beginning, Senceless. I almost walk out in the beginning, But when the action started, it was interesting. The ending SUCKS. The camera movements can almost make you dizzy. I would like to see the monsters again in a different movie…..

  • Erik Samdahl

    Hi Roberto,

    Thanks for the comment. What would you have done better in the beginning? I think it was necessary to build into the situation, rather than just jump into the action like an ordinary monster movie. The ending wasn’t spectacular, but I don’t know how they could have done much better given the perspective of the characters.

    They are thinking about doing a sequel, but I assume it would be handheld again.

  • forum rider

    If I made Cloverfield here is a list of what I would’ve done:

    1) Cut that party scene real short in the beginning of the film because it played no part later on in the film.
    2)Given an explanation as to why the girl that gets bitten and infected as to how her body reacted to it the way it did.
    3)Shown the monster a lot more, you only see it two or three times throughout the whole film
    4)Steady the camera a little better in some scenes, I know they wanted it to be realistic but for gods sake it’ll give you really bad motion sickness
    5) The humor was not funny, with a crappy film like that, you’re gonna need some real good comic relief
    Last but not least 6) I wouldve gotten to the point much sooner than they did and had another explanation for where the monster came from.

  • Erik Samdahl

    Thanks, forum rider. I wasn’t expecting everyone to like the film. In response to your points:

    1) Completely disagree. This whole party sequence set the scene for what was to come; without it, we would have had characters who were there simply to run for their lives without any interesting relationships or whatever. Two, it strikes the point that these people had completely normal lives until the monster attacks.
    2. I agree with you. Did they kill her or did she explode. Assuming the exploded, a little more detail would have been nice.
    3. I thought they showed the monster enough. I liked the fact that you didn’t see it that much.
    4. I never got motion sickness, but there are some scenes that could have benefited from a more standard approach.
    5. Yeah, the humor wasn’t that good, but I thought the screenplay was adequate enough.
    6. Disagree. Every time monster movies try to explain where the monster came from, it ends up being cheesy. And since the movie is from the perspective of ordinary people, how would they ever figure that out? Lastly, in the final scene you do see something crash in the water. There are plenty of websites out there to explain it.

  • Cloverfield.
    I cannot believe that the the same guy can produce an excellent TV show like lost and then produce this crap. Robbery, that all it is, I was robbed of my money to see this hyped up, over rated piece of crap. Message for JJ Abrahms, stick to making Lost okay.