![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Review: Cloverfield
It's a bad sign when I leave the movie theatre still thinking about the trailers.
I went to see Cloverfield in the end. It's always Mark Kermode's reviews that send me to see movies I don't think I'll like and usually his recommendations work out. This time...no. The thing he said in his review that made me change my mind was "it's short". But it's not short enough. The film takes a ridiculously long time to get going, and by the end I was just thinking "die already and lets get this over with".
The sad thing is it could have been a pretty decent disaster movie without the "gimmick" of being, supposedly, an amateur film. The basic plot is okay: party, lovers' quarrel, giant scary monster attacking the city, boy has to be a hero and go save girl, his friends tag along and there's lots of shocks, lots of gore and a super-high body count. But you know how boring most home videos are? Yeah - so is this. Oh, there are some great moments. Bits and pieces of it are masterly. The whole tunnel sequence, the claustrophobic feel. It's good. But as a whole it falls down.
In part, it's because the movie tells you from the outset that all ended badly. So once our heroes reach their goal, you just know everyone's gonna die horribly: the only source of interest is who's gonna die when, and how. And, unfortunately, none of the characters are real enough for me to care.
(Also: girl in party clothes and flimsy four inch heels takes way, way too long to take the bloody shoes off. Her feet would have been bloody blisters after all the running and hiding. You can always tell when a film is directed by a man from details like that. Women know you can't run from alien monsters in party shoes. It's a small detail but it's a bloody annoying one.)
So Cloverfield: not worth the hype. Save your money and catch Blair Witch on freeview instead.
Oh, those movie trailers? They showed a trailer for the new Rambo film (isn't Sly getting a little old for that role?) Anyhow, the trailer opens with a man holding a rosary - you don't see his face - and then the voiceover says something about a soldier without a country. Weird how fast I flashed on John Winchester, isn't it?
One track mind? Me?
I went to see Cloverfield in the end. It's always Mark Kermode's reviews that send me to see movies I don't think I'll like and usually his recommendations work out. This time...no. The thing he said in his review that made me change my mind was "it's short". But it's not short enough. The film takes a ridiculously long time to get going, and by the end I was just thinking "die already and lets get this over with".
The sad thing is it could have been a pretty decent disaster movie without the "gimmick" of being, supposedly, an amateur film. The basic plot is okay: party, lovers' quarrel, giant scary monster attacking the city, boy has to be a hero and go save girl, his friends tag along and there's lots of shocks, lots of gore and a super-high body count. But you know how boring most home videos are? Yeah - so is this. Oh, there are some great moments. Bits and pieces of it are masterly. The whole tunnel sequence, the claustrophobic feel. It's good. But as a whole it falls down.
In part, it's because the movie tells you from the outset that all ended badly. So once our heroes reach their goal, you just know everyone's gonna die horribly: the only source of interest is who's gonna die when, and how. And, unfortunately, none of the characters are real enough for me to care.
(Also: girl in party clothes and flimsy four inch heels takes way, way too long to take the bloody shoes off. Her feet would have been bloody blisters after all the running and hiding. You can always tell when a film is directed by a man from details like that. Women know you can't run from alien monsters in party shoes. It's a small detail but it's a bloody annoying one.)
So Cloverfield: not worth the hype. Save your money and catch Blair Witch on freeview instead.
Oh, those movie trailers? They showed a trailer for the new Rambo film (isn't Sly getting a little old for that role?) Anyhow, the trailer opens with a man holding a rosary - you don't see his face - and then the voiceover says something about a soldier without a country. Weird how fast I flashed on John Winchester, isn't it?
One track mind? Me?
no subject
Some men know that, too! ;-D Not from experience, you know. *looks around nervously* I swear! I think there was a scene on Psych not long ago where Juliet was chasing a guy in high heels. And she caught him! It always makes me chuckle, and then feel bad for the actress. :D
no subject
Oh, of course not. *whistles innocently*
Yeah, some guys know it. But this was such a thing in the movie. I mean, when it all starts, they're at a party. So when the nasty stuff started I kept trying to get a look at her shoes. Just, you know, to check. They're running through mucky streets, then metro tunnels. The first time I got a good look at those shoes was when she finally took them off (in a place, BTW, where she'd have to be crazy to walk around barefoot). And not only was it impossible that she could have done all that running in those shoes, but they were perfect. Not even dirty.
And I'm ranting...but it bugs me. No wonder men have such unrealistic expectations of women, when "realistic" movies like this put the heroine in a perfect protective bubble so her pretty shoes won't get mussed.
(I bet they were product placement.)
no subject
I missed this part the first time I posted, so... I'm back. :D Yes, he is. And for the Rocky role. But who else is he going to play? It's kind of sad, really, seeing Stallone write and produce a movie starring... himself. Did he also direct it? Either way... it reeks of a vanity project.
Of course, I thought the same thing about Die Hard 4 and that was actually pretty good... (utterly implausible, but sometimes it's fun watching a freeway chase between a semi and a jet plane :D)
no subject
It does, and I'm not a big fan of the Rambo movies, but the trailer looked sort of interesting.
There seems to be a lot of that going on lately. I mean, Indy IV? It's a great idea, but Harrison Ford is so not going to be convincing at his age.
(Why are Americans so afraid to recast a role? Learn from Bond, people. Learn from Bond.)
But who else is he going to play?
Well, Sly's choices are somewhat limited by his utter lack of talent. He's a smart guy, though, unlike most of the old action movie stars. If he stayed with writing/producing he'd probably do okay.