Head to Head – Cloverfield

Welcome to the latest edition of Head to Head, in which our Quickflix critic takes on our readers in a rip-snorting battle to the death! You pick the film, and we pick the fight!

This week, a reigning victor returned to take on the Cloverfield monster. Rohan Daenke previously took on DVDman (and won) by eviscerating 30 Days of Night. But can he defeat smiling assassin Simon Miraudo? For his troubles, he received a double pass to Pixar’s latest film Up.

Rohan Daenke will argue AGAINST the film, while Quickflix critic Simon Miraudo will argue FOR it. Let us know in the comments section below who you agree with. Spare no vitriol! Choose your side! There can only be one winner!

Rohan Daenke – 1/5

What a god-awful film. Contains: basically no plot, a panicky script full of screams and “we gotta get outta here” lines, a very poor plot device in the form of a piss-weak love story and no explanation whatsoever about the beastie that is terrorising the city. As for that particular beastie, it is some lame mix of Godzilla, a pterodactyl and the Predator that inexplicably spawns little aliens that like to stab people with their praying mantis-like legs. Just be glad that the movie only goes for 75 minutes. It’s painful enough as it is! DVDs of this film would be better used as coasters or hung on trees to keep the birds away!

Simon Miraudo – 4.5/5

Rohan, your reign of terror ends here. Cloverfield is one of the most enjoyable disaster movies of the past decade. Compare it to the bland, blah-fest of Roland Emmerich’s Godzilla, or Roland Emmerich’s The Day After Tomorrow (or any Roland Emmerich film for that matter) and you see just how impressive Cloverfield is. It eschews the tired clichés of the genre and gives us a brisk, energetic and emotionally engaging rollercoaster ride through the decimated streets of New York City. The cinematography is some of the best (and most underrated) of the past few years. It will be a long time before I forget the experience of seeing this movie in the cinema; being thrown around as if I were strapped into a vibrating “monster movie” simulator.

Now it’s over to you! What were your thoughts on Cloverfield? Let us know in the comments section below. And if you would like to be featured in the next Head to Head, and possibly win some free movie tickets, send your mini-reviews to us here at Quickflix!

7 Responses to “Head to Head – Cloverfield”

  1. Oh man, I hated Cloverfield. I did not enjoy the film one bit. The camerawork didn't bother me or anything like that, I just found the characters completely insufferable and boring. Nothing about them made me care one bit about whether they lived or died. It really just felt like all the relationship stuff was just filler to get the movie up to a feature length.I didn't find the movie at all suspenseful or scary because every single scary moment had so much build up that you knew exactly what was going to happen minutes before it actually happened. There were some cool scenes with the monster attacking the city but they were so few and far between. Overall I just found the movie so boring.

  2. Also, almost anything is good when compared to Roland Emmerich's Godzilla and Day After Tomorrow.

  3. Thank you Rick. I coudn't agree more. If some time had have been put into character development i might have cared that they were being taken out but as it stands i was cheering on the monster(s), because as soon as they were all dead the movie would surely come to an end! Even some cliched war-room politics or government conspiracy could have helped the plot out a little but alas this was not included. Also, the use of Roland Emmerich for comparative appraisal is hardly a fair tool. If Cloverfield is to be rated as a genuinely good monster flick, how does it compare to korean film "the Host", King Kong or Godzilla (Japanese version).

  4. Haha, I guess the Emmerich comparison was unfair.Now, while Cloverfield doesn't compare with The Host (and honestly, what does?), I think it completely trumps Jackson's King Kong.It seems to me that liking this film comes down to the viewer's engagement with the main characters. If you hate them, you'll hate the movie. I realise I am one of the few people to actually think these characters were interesting enough to follow for 80 minutes; I realise how 'annoying' their insignificant relationship quibbles could have seemed. However, I was genuinely interested in them on an emotional level.So sue me!

  5. I think this film is more about putting the viewer in the situation of being in the middle of a monster movie. While your running from the monster, you're not going to get filled in on what the government or army are doing about things … the only plot you would know about would be what you and those around you are doing and why.I thought that the cinematography was very well done … giving teasing glimpses of the monster. The only problem I had with it was how the plot reasoned having the cam on the whole time … I know it had to be on for there to be a movie but I found myself wondering why you wouldn't have pocketed the thing and ran your ass off in many of the situations they found themselves in.Over all, I thought it was a good effort purely because it didn't give us the same old rehashed stuff that most monster movies give us.

  6. I think if you check the facts, DVDman cleaned up on 30 Days of Night by 3 votes to 1. But I guess counting never was your strong point, Simon. For the record – http://blog.quickflix.com.au/2009/08/head-to-head-30-days-of-night.html

  7. @EraI don't have time for your fancy counting skill Era! I got important articles to write!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: