Cloverfield better than expected
I saw Cloverfield tonight. I had two things on my mind as I paid $7.50 at Penn Square: motion sickness and the countless reviews I read beforehand.
Blair Witch about made me sick from the camera movements, and it didn’t take long into Cloverfield before I started feeling similar nausea. But it wasn’t too bad. After awhile, you really wished they had more steady camera shots. Or maybe, after seeing the film you wished you could watch it again with a standard Hollywood camera approach. Kind of a, ok what really happened in Manhattan.
Most reviews I read were positive. But some, like the NY Times, thought the movie was stupid.
Honestly, it was better than I expected. The storyline was actually good. The monster was scarier than most. I don’t get scared from movies. Never have. And the Cloverfield monster wasn’t going to come close. But as a demonic beast that attacks Times Square monster goes, it didn’t look bad. And the destruction of Manhattan was well done by the expensive special effects houses they employed.
Since I had just been to Manhattan last month, the movie probably appealed to me more than it would have a few months ago.
It’s Friday
sharedVideo(1381682827)
3 Things
sharedVideo(1380784842)
DnA: How to drive on ice
sharedVideo(1379597169)
3 Things you should know
sharedVideo(1379595121)
MacWorld: thinner laptops and iPhones that know where you are
sharedVideo(1379196514)
