Cloverfield

It's pretty tough- check that- it's practically impossible to live up to hype. I had my first run-in with hype when Batman (Tim Burton's version) came out in 1989. Severe disappointment didn't even cover it. My buddy Jon and I anxiously awaited it's arrival and when it came we were there- super long line wait 'n all. When the movie was over and the lights came up everyone was on their feet applauding. We were on our feet too saying "Let's get the fuck out of here!" Thank God for Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins- faaaaaaaaaaar better. Any-who, with the marketing and mystery surrounding Cloverfield the hype was nearing epic proportions and I started to worry because I didn't want Batman-like disappointment again. Due to a busy schedule I wasn't able to see Cloverfield until the other day and I was not disappointed. Quite the opposite in fact.

I was extremely anxious for the first 15 minutes because I knew what was coming and I just wanted it to happen. But the film is getting you to know the characters and their situation a bit before, well...you know. Rob is moving to Japan and his friends are throwing him a going away party. His brother Jason and his girlfriend are the main hosts and Jason passes off "camera testimonials" to Hud. Hud spots Marlena, who isn't really supposed to be there and falls in love or lust or whatever, with her almost immediately. The biggest problem, however is that Rob has recently slept with Beth, a longtime friend, first time lover. She shows up to the party with some fucking tool because Rob didn't know how to talk to her after they had sex. It's alot right? And, really, it happens in a short amount of time, but that's what was great about it. It's also what's realistic about it. I hung with a fairly large group of close friends throughout college and that's how it happens; word travels fast and everyone knows everyone elses business in 2.2 seconds. There is a very real feel brought to this movie, not just from the handheld handicam camera work, but from the writing and acting.

Although I was getting into the story, I was also very anxious through the first scenes of the film because I knew what was in the mail, so to speak. When it happens, I had stopped being anxious and was really getting into the scene at hand and then- WHAM- it hits. From there the fucking wheels come off. This is an intense movie. And tense. I was tense throughout. My fiance almost chewed her fingers off her hand after she took care of the nails. There are moments where the action settles down a bit but the intensity stays.

The idea of first person camera work intrigued me and was largely the reason I was attracted to this film. Execution is another story- things can get screwed up easily, but not here. Here it works. Very well. The action and the reality of the situation are palpable because of the camerawork. The constant movement of the frame- panning, adjusting, twisting and tilting...it feels real. You are never taken out of the moment with a cutaway. And there's no editing to speak of. I mean there is but it's just the camera being turned off and on so sentences and scenes get cut and then WHAM you're back into a new one. There are no cutaways or reaction shots. There also is no music telling you how to feel in each scene and believe me you don't miss it. The reality of it all weighed on me and in large part it was due to the technical work, but the acting was a huge part of it as well.

The cast is made up of, not unknowns, but not well knowns- if you known what I mean. You'll recognize or vaguely recognize most of them, or maybe not at all if you don't watch a lot of TV. Everyone was very natural and in a movie like this where it's shot, essentially, raw documentary style how do you act natural in the middle of a very unnatural situation. Natural in this situation would be an orgy of shock, confusion, shit-your-pants-fear, I mean someone might have a breakdown and someone else might take charge. Even though there is a script, it feels like there isn't by the interactions between the characters. Hud, played by TJ Miller, is the man behind the camera and he is constantly making comments and observations. His performance is paramount to the film coming off and he plays it very well. I also liked, Michael Stahl-David, who played Rob, and Lizzy Caplan, who played Marlena. Jessica Lucas plays Lilly, and she's currently on CSI. She has the potential to be a big star. As an aspiring writer/producer/director I get really excited for people that break into the big time and it was exciting for me to see all these young actors kicking ass in a Major Motion Picture, produced by a Major Hollywood director/writer/producer, which, conveniently brings me to my next point

JJ Abrams is the producer, NOT, the director, which isn't to say that he didn't have alot of input- I'm sure he did, but at the end of the day, he's the producer. I can pretty much guarantee you he wasn't in the edit room, day in and day out, like the director, Matt Reeves probably was. People get this confused alot and as a result sometimes the director or writer doesn't get the credit he or she deserves. This film is a mammoth undertaking and one false move could fuck the whole thing up. Matt Reeves did an amazing job and I applaud him. He's a writer/director who co-created Felicity and directed The Pallbearer, both very credible pieces of work, but an out of control, train off the tracks monster movie they were not. I can't wait to see what this guy has up his sleeve next. By the way, I'm taking nothing away from JJ Abrams. I'm sure he had alot of input and the man is clearly talented- he delivered the best Mission Impossible movie by far- but people think it's his movie and it's isn't. Not entirely at least.

I want to address something I've read in some reviews, not all, but some. People have complained that no one in their right mind would have continued filming through all the chaos. I disagree. Completely. First of all you can't definitely say what any one person would do in this situation because you don't definitely know, but that's beside the point. I know someone who would continue filming as he was trying to run for his life. He would have actually been going out of his way to get cool shots. His name is Pottyboy. Got to his site and you'll see what I mean. But even that doesn't give the slightest idea of how much has shot in his life. This is also besides the point. Making a case for the movie being unbelievable because you don't feel someone would continue filming is a stupid point to make. There wouldn't be a movie in the first place if the person didn't film it, so you shouldn't be in the theater if you don't like the concept. By taking a "realistic" or "documentary" approach the film opens itself up to such criticisms, but I feel they are unfounded and moot. When you go see Transformers you don't say "How did they get a guy in the middle of the highway to film them fighting?" Why? Because it's a movie, entertaining you, hopefully, so you know it's not real. Well Cloverfield is presented as "found footage" therefore we should buy into the fact, even though we know it's not real that someone did continue filming whilst running for their life and enjoy what we see, much like we'll buy into Transformers. This is why we go to the movies, folks, so we can be entertained. Hopefully I've made myself clear on this because it baffles me that someone would use that as an argument.

Either way, Cloverfield is an amazing film and I can't wait to see it again. An extraordinarily effective and groundbreaking approach to a monster movie that lived up it's brilliant marketing plan. Good luck to anyone who tries to top it. They'll need it.

Cloverfield Party

This could be cool. Sadly I'll be knee deep in work. Who's going to go so I can live vicariously.

Cloverfield Online

Ain't it Cool has five minutes of Cloverfield online right now. I started watching it but I'm going to try and be patient for 1.18.08

Cloverfield

Okay here we go. Small but important tidbit.

Cloverfield

It appears thats the title. Works for me...not that I have a choice. I like that it isn't a direct (as far as we know) reference to a monster or event, i.e. Godzilla or Independence Day. Better than the title is the new trailer. This trailer shows, however fleeting, much than we've seen yet so if you want to remain completely in the dark about the film don't watch it. Not that it gives much away but some people don't want to know anything. That being said, it's a kick ass trailer.

Of note...look at the page the trailer is on. NYC smoking in the background of a headless Statue of Liberty. Spiderman 3 also had the floor of a building, in NYC, destroyed with people falling out. Why is that okay, but the film United 93 was deemed "too soon?" Just curious...

Hey more Lehane & Cloverfield to boot...

The NY Post had some info via Brad Grey yesterday. Brad Grey currently runs Paramount. He's a force in Hollywood. I'm a fan because his taste is right in my wheelhouse (that’s disgusting) and he supports people and projects I want to see get made. Check out his imdb page. You may recognize a few titles, like, um, oh I don't know, The Departed, a little show called The Sopranos and dozens of others...Well he spilled some beans recently. He stated that Leonardo DiCaprio is starring in Shutter Island, a Dennis Lehane novel I've been anxiously awaiting to be brought to the big screen. Guess who's directing? Scorsese. Um, hi, can someone knock me out? I never in a million (years that is) would've guessed he would be behind it. Let's hope it stays that way. Apparently they're set to roll cameras in March. Who'll play opposite Leo is the question? I love Billy Crudup. He rules and he hasn't gotten the recognition he truly deserves. Either way, being that it's Scorsese, I'm sure it won't be tough to get an excellent actor in the role.

Before I move on I need to express my love for Shutter Island. I take the train to work everyday so it affords me the time to read a lot of books, which is nice. It’s practically the only thing I enjoy about the commute. I read Shutter Island on the train. One night as I was coming into my station, I was like 40 pages out from the end. Got off the train, raced home and immediately sat down and started reading. Couldn’t put the fucker down. I dare say it’s my favorite Lehane book. So that’s where my excitement started.

Cloverfield. Grey spilled that it is a "classic monster movie" Either I missed something along the way or he didn't realize there is a big internet movement drumming up buzz about this film by not exactly saying what it's about. I know that it's been hinted at severely by several sources but this is a major player, who would know, saying it is a monster movie. So there's that.

New Cloverfield Poster

The film is still shooting in NYC so they're going to have a short time in the edit room. Actually they're probably editing as they shoot, but for a film with appears to have a lot of cgi they're going to be busy. On the poster, notice the wake left behind by whatever storm in the city destroying everything.

Cloverfield aka 1-18-08 aka Monstrous?

Dig this.

Cloverfield aka 1-18-08

***UPDATE***
This is from an article over at AICN. You can read the full article here. What the article says in a nutshell is that "Moriarity" one of the main men over AICN has broken all the 1-18-08 stuff since it started and here is the latest:

"The film starts with a rescue crew cleaning up after the entire incident, and one of them finds a camera. They rewind the tape, press play... and the playback is the movie that unfolds."

Pretty fucking cool.

JJAbrams, creator of Alias, Felicity, a little show called Lost and director of MI3 is producing a new movie and the premise is sealed tighter than a snare drum. The working title was Cloverfield, which has now become 1-18-08, the date it's going to be released. In the last few weeks things have been popping up about it, but no one knows much. Then the trailer dropped before Transformers and got the country buzzing about what the hell it was. The word is that it's a monster movie, but that might be the easy answer. Honestly I think it would be too bad if that's all it was after this early hype. One thing I like is that the early word was it was going to be shot POV style with a camcorder and from the looks of the trailer, that's the case.

Abrams recently sent an email to AICN. He explained that there were numerous websites out there involving the movie, but that the fans had only found one of them- www.1-18-08.com/ There's 3 pictures on the site now, there was 2 the other day. If you click on them you can move them around. What the hell it means I have no idea. There are a few more sites and whether they are diversions or not, again I don't know. I don't really much care either, Abrams did his job; He got me psyched about the film. Now I almost don't want to know anymore and go into the movie blind, but that won't happen. By sending emails and creating cryptic trailers and websites he's just creating more buzz. And that's the key folks. Remember The Blair Witch Project? Of course you do. When it premiered at Sundance the filmmakers had posted missing signs of the actors in the film all over town, and everyone thought the movie was real. So real that none of the audience members would walk home after the midnight screening because they were too scared. Everyone waited for the shuttle. Before the movie went into wide release they posted missing signs on college campuses all over the country. The buzz created around that movie was huge. I saw it opening weekend at the Angelica in NYC and at that point it still wasn't clear what was real and what wasn't.

JJ Abrams isn't selling his movie as real, but the buzz he's creating already is going to make this movie, whatever they decide to call it, huge.

Here's the trailer.

On a side note I think my buddy steve depino and I are operating on a strange wavelength. I wrote this up a few days ago and haven't had a chance to post it. He posted something very similiar on this blog also mentioning blair witch, etc...strange. maybe we're involved with Cloverfield aka 1-18-08