Movie Series Review #4: Cloverfield
If interdimensional aliens invaded Earth…
“My name is Robert Hawkins. It’s 6:42 AM on Saturday, May 23rd. Approximately seven hours ago, some… thing attacked the city. I don’t know what it is.”
Introduction
Ah yes, Cloverfield. The movie trilogy kickstarted by a young, vibrant J.J. Abrams that no one asked for, and yet, still turned out surprisingly okay! The series tells the tale of an immense space mantis which decimates New York City and threatens the human population through the perspectives of three different groups; first — a posse of party goers in downtown New York, second — a trio taking refuge in a dystopian emergency shelter, and third — the team of astronauts and scientists who inadvertently started it all. Contrary to most movie serieseses, the Cloverfield films are scarcely connected to each other, the sequels only briefly referencing the earlier films at key moments. All three films also utilize vastly different directing styles, settings, and moods to tell their stories. While the prospect of a gigantic monster destroying a city is certainly nothing new *glances at Tokyo*, it’s safe to say that the Cloverfield franchise certainly employs a different approach than the never ending suite of monster flicks before it. Throughout its three films, Cloverfield has taught us to A) never trust a 1,200 foot tall monster, B) always know where the nearest vat of acid is, and C) never eat more than your fair share of worms.
Cloverfield (2008)
Score: 79/100
As far as found-footage films go, Cloverfield is about as good as it gets. (Suck on that, Blair Witch!) Featuring the most terrifying on-screen monster since Hell’s Kitchen, Cloverfield kickstarts the series with a surprisingly well-paced and engaging story. The film immediately establishes its aesthetic with intermixed recordings of a surprise farewell party for a new husband-to-be being taped over a romantic getaway between him and his fiancé, filmed on the most mid-2000’s camera you can imagine (despite the fact that sometimes the date and time disappear from the corner of the screen). This duality persists throughout the rest of the film, and adds a really cool element of juxtaposition between their current situation and their lives before the monster attack. Though the social drama that ensues at the party — somehow all caught on film — is generally cliché and uninteresting, the film does do a great job here with character differentiation; you don’t need more than one watch to separate the characters out in your mind, perhaps not by name, but at least with simple descriptions such as “nerd goth girl” or “dumb hot guy”. This allows some level of connection with all your favorite characters before their inevitable, untimely deaths! The dramatic, character-driven mood of the intro quickly gives way when an explosion occurs downtown, and news reports surface of some…thing attacking the city.
Cloverfield makes use of some bold imagery in the wake of 9/11 popular culture. The scene where they surmount the leaning apartment building amidst a dusty landscape littered with debris is a prime example of this, and it’s hard not to see the parallels between this scene and the real life New York disaster. This act would be more powerful if it weren’t for the weird, out of place dialogue of the camera guy, who is constantly trying to crack jokes or make nerdy references in times of great turmoil. Though a few of these jokes land spot-on, most of them are unapologetically unrealistic reactions to the situation at hand, causing *some* viewers to sigh very, very loudly. Despite this shoddy dialogue and other inter-character clichés, the well-paced action and slow reveal of the origin and appearance of the Clover monster maintains audience interest as the plot progresses. This mystery is then squelched by the strange ending, which seems as though it was only written in for the purpose of showing the monster’s full form... Why would a monster the size of a skyscraper bend down just to eat one dude with a camera? Beats me. Also, everyone dies, which is a cliché within itself.
10 Cloverfield Lane (2016)
Score: 87/100
8 years after the titular found-footage monster flick, J.J. Abrams returns with his sophomore addition to the franchise, and what a strange ride it is. Our main gal, Michelle, is a newly single Pringle running from a break up in New Orleans when her car is sideswiped off the road. She awakens, her injuries tended to, in an emergency bunker owned by a man named Howard. He claims that he found and rescued her, that the world is ending, and that only his shelter can keep them safe. Upon watching the first 80 minutes, you can’t be blamed for repeatably verifying whether you are watching the right movie — there is very little evidence beyond the film’s title that you are even in the same universe as Cloverfield. Utilizing a minimalist setting and character suite, 10 Cloverfield Lane benefits from much more complete character development and interaction than its predecessor. The audience struggles for half the film with whether Howard can be trusted, seeming honest upon verifying the wasteland world which he claimed to be outside or when he tells heartwarming stories about his late daughter. Howard’s motives unravel, however, when Michelle sees that his truck is the vehicle that swiped her off the road, and when she finds bloody scratches in the bunker’s attic from Howard’s daughter, who Howard had stated was “no longer with us”. There is never a dull moment in the character interaction between Michelle, Howard, and the film’s third wheel, Emmett, bolstered by convincing performances all around. SPOILER: Emmett gets got in a barrel of acid.
The movie has an extremely different aesthetic from the previous film, playing out much more like a mystery/suspense work rather than a monster flick. This gives it a much more cerebral feel than Cloverfield, leaving the viewer constantly guessing what direction the plot will go next. The aesthetic is also notably darker and more bleak than that of its predecessor, which is surprising considering how the first movie ended with New York City being nuked. Of the three Cloverfield films, 10 Cloverfield Lane definitely has the strongest finish, Michelle symbolically killing off Howard with his own acid vat and blowing up his shelter, then bridging the gap with the previous film in an epic stand-off with an alien craft. The only bone I have to pick with this film is the missing link between the Cloverfield monsters and the monsters depicted at the end of this film. In Cloverfield, we see the giant Clover monster and it’s hoards of wee babies. In this film, we see hovering alien spacecraft and creatures with tentacles... What gives??
The Cloverfield Paradox (2018)
Score: 72/100
This film got ragged by film critics, and I’m really not sure why. While I do recognize it as the weak link of the Cloverfield franchise, The Cloverfield Paradox expands the Cloverfield universe into a realm that it hadn’t yet explored, and that has to be acknowledged. The movie takes place aboard a space station in 2028 where a team of scientists are preparing to test an energy producing particle collider which could potentially power humanity’s growing population in the wake of an energy crisis. Like it’s predecessor, this film only makes scant reference to the previous two films, briefly mentioning an author with the same last name as Howard who writes a book about how testing such an accelerator could open up a portal to another dimension and allow monsters to threaten the Earth. The testing of the accelerator warps the space station and all aboard to a parallel universe where strange things begin to happen to the ship and the crew. New crew members appear, walls become fluid, worms somehow teleport into some guy’s stomach, and a mirror version of Earth appears in which their exact mission fails and crashes back to the planet.
While the film does utilize some unique and strange effects to show us the consequences of the titular paradox, it never actually explains why these very specific things happen, and not, I don’t know, other things. Take, if you will, the fluid walls. Okay, so solid objects become “phased” in this universe. Then why does the wall chop off that guy’s arm with no pain? Why do they later find the arm crawling around like a sentient creature? Why do all the worms AND the ship’s gyroscope teleport exactly inside that other guy’s stomach? And what does any of this have to do with the portal which the Clover monster presumably comes from?! With all the random parts of the station and crew teleporting all over the place, it’s a miracle that the station is still space-worthy. The effects seem to be localized in specific ways to tailor to the plot, which is admittedly frustrating while viewing. Regardless of the ambiguity of the Cloverfield Paradox effects, the film does still deal with some cool sci-fi themes like the global energy crisis, the ethics of theoretical science, and how a person would react knowing they could live a better life in a parallel universe. The film also has a surprisingly strong antagonist, despite the fact that the character development of the rest of the crew is more or less underwhelming. At its worst, The Cloverfield Paradox is a weird and different lens of viewing the Cloverfield universe, and it has a fun time doing it. Haters gonna hate, but I can’t hate that!
Conclusion
Taking a 3-pronged approach to tell one confusing monster story is certainly a bold move by the Abram’s team, but the series still lands on its mutant feet more times than one would expect. Each film tackles completely different perspectives of the same loose idea, and that’s something I have to admit I’ve never seen before in a trilogy, so props there. All things considered, this three-leaf clover may not be the flashiest trilogy in the expansive field of monster movies, but we are still lucky to have it nonetheless.
