Cloverfield is J. J. Abrams’ take on an all American monster movie told through the lens of a single handheld camera held by the conveniently named Hud (Haha! HUD! Hahah! Get it? Get it?). It has been described as Godzilla meets Blair Witch Project, and having seen neither of those I can say that is probably accurate. Further plot summary at the end of this post – spoiler warning. (An aside: How the [expletive] does Wikipedia have a 1200 word plot summary!? That should not be possible for this move!)

One of the things I had heard before going into the movie was the possibility that it could incur motion sickness in some people. And while I can easily see how that can happen, the handheld camera gets very jerky at times, it did not bother me very much. Not in that respect. But the camera is set to build suspense, and I am sorry but a jerky camera alone is not doing it for me. It only got annoying.

Then there are the characters in this movie – a more unsympathetic, unlikable bunch of people… I ended up rooting for the monster, and not in a good way like in King Kong, I just could not care less for their fate. The only redeeming quality is that they all die by the end. (Oh yeah, that was a spoiler. Oops…)

That said the movie was pretty.You can tell that effects and lighting had a big enough budget to do exactly what they wanted, and it paid off. Then again I seem to say that about a lot of the movies I have been watching lately – they are ‘bad’ or ‘so-so’ or ‘all right’ or ‘meh’ or ‘the book was better’- but at least they ‘look pretty’. I think I have to stop watching movies that are trying to look pretty and start watching movies that have a story. Or perhaps I should just see Rambo – there at least I know what I’m going to get.

As for the headline, that is the quote I get when I watch the trailer in Front Row. If you think that was a way for the studio not to ruin the story, and build up the suspense, that is only part of the story. The other part is that there is no story to ruin, as pointed out by this very accurate synopsis posted on IMDB:

For 20 minutes it was a going away party, then something blows up so everyone runs down to the street and starts yelling about what to do, then something blows up and everyone runs into a building and starts yelling about what to do, then they decide to go find their friend and go outside and something blows up so they run into the subway and yell about what to do, then there’s a 2 second flash of some spider alien attacking someone so they run out of the subway into the arms of some military triage and yell about what to do, then the person who got attacked was infected and they blow up, so then the people run away and yell about what to do, then something blows up so they go into a building and yell about what to do, then they get their friend and something blows up so they run to central park and yell about what to do, then the monster shows up for 2 seconds and kills the cameraman so someone else grabs the camera and they run under a bridge and yell about what to do then something blows up and its over.

I just saved you $9, your welcome.

Our story arranged pictures of people coping with the bombing into a slide show, accompanied by the voice of Melinda Liu, a Newsweek reporter describing, over the phone, the harrowing experience of remaining in Baghdad. The outcome of the invasion was still in doubt. There was fear in the reporter’s voice and on the faces of the people in the pictures. [...]

At the conclusion of the screening, there were a few suggestions for tightening here and clarification there. Finally, an NBC/GE executive responsible for “standards” shook his head and wondered about the tone in the reporter’s voice. “Doesn’t it seem like she has a point of view here?” he asked.

You really should take the time to read this story

(Technology Review via Ars Technica)

Now, granted, these are all bubbles already mentioned and should be put on the 2007 list, but these are just the beginning. Most all of these are yet to burst: imagine the coverage when one or more should. It won’t be pretty.

Buzzwords have the unique quality of being used, and used excessively: I expect to see “bubble” follow this path in 2008.

Let me explain a bit what I mean by the phrase fantasy is dead. Just to make it absolutely clear, it does not refer to books. Fantasy in book form is alive an well. The silver screen on the other hand is another story entirely. And here is why: there are only three truly good fantasy movies made since the turn of the century.

I can’t say that I have seen all fantasy movies made since 2000, nor do I wish I had. Though I have seen Narnia, I have seen the Harry Potters. I have seen the Golden Compass. I have seen the Wizard of Oz retelling, Tin Man (small aside: ‘the OC’, wth?). I have seen the Seeker: The Dark Is Rising. I did not see Eragon, but from what I hear it’s not a loss. Neither of these are one of the three, but they have a common theme…

To tell the truth, the three also fit well within the theme of the previously mentioned movies, but there have got to be some exceptions. Thankfully.

Fantasy movies are made to cater to a specific audience, namely the fans of the books. And at times the fact that there already is a fan base seems to green-light cherry-picking the best bits of the story (the scenic, majestic bits, the grand battle and the fight with the dragon). The rest the fans can fill in – they have read the book after all. Case in point, the Golden Compass.

Truth be told, the grand battles and the dragons are often important parts in a fantasy book, but there is no point in showing them without also knowing why they are important. If I have to use meta knowledge from the books to know what is going on, the movie is failing at basic storytelling. To quote my good friend Morghus:

At the mention of the movie-script I’ll try not to go off in an endless and furious rant. Suffice to say it made me sad. Very sad. Plot holes the size of Denmark tends to be noticeable.

Not all the movies I have mentioned are bad. Some are decent, some are half-decent. Some are fun. But I consider none of them truly good movies (the Harry Potter series is probably the one that come closest). However as long as there are series with a strong fan base, these movies will continue to be made. And I will most likely go see them. And at the end of the movie I will say my usual “The book was better”. It always is.