I went to see Cloverfield tonight.

Unlike Justin’s commentary on it, I might just spoil it, so you’d best look away now if you’ve not seen it but plan to.

But before you go, basically more or less everyone dies.

Anyway. I agree with Justin’s observation that Cloverfield will divide people – the shaky camerawork is not to everyone’s tastes, and while it makes the film hugely realistic and even believeable, it is quite nauseous after a while, which I suppose adds to the realism.

Basically, the film tells the story of a monster attacking New York, as seen on a camcorder. But what makes the film so tense, gripping and edge-of-the-seat is that we learn little about the monster. It is rarely seen on screen and we learn nothing about its origins, and therefore the horror and panic comes from what we don’t know, rather than what we do.

In that sense the film’s philosophy is simple – use the monster as a MacGuffin to explore people’s panic at the destruction of their city.

I loved it. I fully understand why others won’t, though.

In other news, I had a really quick trip to sunny – no, really – Stornoway today. Miraculously, I remembered my camera. Here’s the cream of the crop, such as it is.

2 thoughts on “Cloverfield

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *