Alright friends and neighbors, today we're going to talk about a different kind of monster movie.
My post last week on indie-extraordinaire Monsters extolled the virtues of subtlety and how to evoke mood by presenting the quieter, more tense aspect of the unseen. The appeal in that film was the ambiance and it's minimal presentation, eschewing EXPLOSIONS for long silences and the unknown. Today's subject matter is pretty much the opposite of the little monster movie that could. What I'm referring to is 2008's Cloverfield.
While directed by Matt Reeves, known mostly for his TV work on the show Felicity, the movie is basically the brain child of J.J. Abrams, creator of the genius and sorely missed Lost. Abrams said the idea stemmed from seeing Godzilla figurines in a Japanese toy shop with his son. Seeing the iconic monster and realizing the impact it had on the culture, he thought to himself "I want to make an American monster" in that vein, our own thing that is unique to this generation.
The movie was filmed under tight wraps with only the slightest of details leaking out during production. A teaser trailer for the movie was shown before theatrical screenings of Transformers, showing the head of the Statue of Liberty being flung down the street in Manhattan with crowds gathering to gape at the spectacle. That was all the audience had to go on, unless you followed the viral marketing that popped up innocuously online. This was back in the days where Myspace was still considered a social viability for relevance, as opposed to today's ultra-ubiquitous Facebook. What fans (correctly) assumed was that the pages were of characters in the movie. These were all linked together from a central website that showed photos of a fractured and broken New York skyline. Further hidden links led to pages showing a beverage company that mined its secret ingredient off the ocean floor. Follow those links and you get a video of a deep-sea drilling station that was sunk by an undersea attack. All of that was meant to give clues to the movie's plot.
Ready? Here goes.
The Blair Witch monster eats New York, attractive people flee in terror.
That about sums it up!
While I admit its a bit of an over simplification, I still enjoy it for what it is. The movie is a modern-day monster movie, a popcorn flick with shaky camera-style, lending a found-footage aesthetic. A group of attractive young people are having a going away party for their friend Rob, and on the night of the party, as another friend films the debauchery, a monster from the ocean floor, 25 stories tall, begins stomping through New York. The next 70+ minutes are spent alternating between running while turning to film fleeting glimpses of the monster and gasping for breath in hiding holes, asking each other just what that thing was and what should they do now? Desperate rescue attempts and edge-of-your-seat close calls fill out the rest of the running time. There are a few cool and creepy moments, such as running from smaller parasites that fall off the larger creature, or stumbling onto the military's ad-hoc quarantine and medical zone.
I know it sounds like I'm pretty roundly dismissing the movie, but despite its obvious flaws and at times frustrating camera work I still hold a soft spot for this overlooked oddity. To me, the movie feels authentic and genuine, despite the ridiculous premise and bland characters. Self interested, boring people in New York? I'll buy it. But what I think really sold it for me is what Roger Ebert, of all people, suggests about the film. He saw it as an unnerving take on our worst (unconscious) fears after September 11th. To ironically allow vanity steer my post, its been said that my generation was one that was profoundly affected by the attacks because we were forced to watch it over and over again on TV after the fact. Seeing this shaky cam footage of people roughly my age, running and screaming from some Lovecraft-ian horror-from-the-depths does affect me and gets a visceral response. It all adds up to one messed up movie. It's short, frenetic and barely focused but it still appeals to me with its immediacy and (to use a phrase I take from The Simpson's Lindsey Naegel) in-your-face attitude.
Yes, this is a flawed movie. It's short, the people are sketches at best and there really is no plot besides "RUN!" but I still find myself enjoying it under the right circumstances. Most often, that would be on a massive TV with a good sound system and a beer. Maybe a couple beers, actually, but the violent camera work might make that difficult, come to think of it. Basically if you're looking for a straight-forward popcorn flick that might actually make you think a bit, give a look. I'm pretty sure it's widely dismissive reception kept the price down.
Oh, and the monster? Pretty awesome and strange, if you ask me.
My post last week on indie-extraordinaire Monsters extolled the virtues of subtlety and how to evoke mood by presenting the quieter, more tense aspect of the unseen. The appeal in that film was the ambiance and it's minimal presentation, eschewing EXPLOSIONS for long silences and the unknown. Today's subject matter is pretty much the opposite of the little monster movie that could. What I'm referring to is 2008's Cloverfield.
While directed by Matt Reeves, known mostly for his TV work on the show Felicity, the movie is basically the brain child of J.J. Abrams, creator of the genius and sorely missed Lost. Abrams said the idea stemmed from seeing Godzilla figurines in a Japanese toy shop with his son. Seeing the iconic monster and realizing the impact it had on the culture, he thought to himself "I want to make an American monster" in that vein, our own thing that is unique to this generation.
The movie was filmed under tight wraps with only the slightest of details leaking out during production. A teaser trailer for the movie was shown before theatrical screenings of Transformers, showing the head of the Statue of Liberty being flung down the street in Manhattan with crowds gathering to gape at the spectacle. That was all the audience had to go on, unless you followed the viral marketing that popped up innocuously online. This was back in the days where Myspace was still considered a social viability for relevance, as opposed to today's ultra-ubiquitous Facebook. What fans (correctly) assumed was that the pages were of characters in the movie. These were all linked together from a central website that showed photos of a fractured and broken New York skyline. Further hidden links led to pages showing a beverage company that mined its secret ingredient off the ocean floor. Follow those links and you get a video of a deep-sea drilling station that was sunk by an undersea attack. All of that was meant to give clues to the movie's plot.
Ready? Here goes.
The Blair Witch monster eats New York, attractive people flee in terror.
That about sums it up!
While I admit its a bit of an over simplification, I still enjoy it for what it is. The movie is a modern-day monster movie, a popcorn flick with shaky camera-style, lending a found-footage aesthetic. A group of attractive young people are having a going away party for their friend Rob, and on the night of the party, as another friend films the debauchery, a monster from the ocean floor, 25 stories tall, begins stomping through New York. The next 70+ minutes are spent alternating between running while turning to film fleeting glimpses of the monster and gasping for breath in hiding holes, asking each other just what that thing was and what should they do now? Desperate rescue attempts and edge-of-your-seat close calls fill out the rest of the running time. There are a few cool and creepy moments, such as running from smaller parasites that fall off the larger creature, or stumbling onto the military's ad-hoc quarantine and medical zone.
Yes, this is a flawed movie. It's short, the people are sketches at best and there really is no plot besides "RUN!" but I still find myself enjoying it under the right circumstances. Most often, that would be on a massive TV with a good sound system and a beer. Maybe a couple beers, actually, but the violent camera work might make that difficult, come to think of it. Basically if you're looking for a straight-forward popcorn flick that might actually make you think a bit, give a look. I'm pretty sure it's widely dismissive reception kept the price down.
Oh, and the monster? Pretty awesome and strange, if you ask me.
