10 Cloverfield Lane

The sophisticated story structure that releases just enough information to keep the viewer entertained is textbook level. Thanks to the fact that Johnny Be Good(man) can be equally terrifying as he is a nice guy, and that there’s always something to look at (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). Lots of powerful moments and cruel twists. Overall, it seems like a costly beginning to a series that we’ll probably never see. The finale works, even if you have an inkling of what is in store, but sweet ignorance is again more preferable. (2016-07-30)

A very current elaboration of a classic disaster theme, which in many respects continues freely in the footsteps of Spielberg's War of the Worlds. Goodman's character is not overshot in any way, and comes off to me exactly like an obese man in survival documentaries - a perverse mixture of rationality, vigilance and paranoia, with a hint something devious. It was a good decision to use highly subjective detail, low depth of field and sharpened sound. Sometimes it suffocates and cramps very pleasantly, sometimes it planes a thick string too ostentatiously and bets on "approximately motivated" twists as well as instructively reaped motifs. But as a whole, it doesn't embarrass the Cloverfield concept; on the contrary, despite all the modeling, the result is a thrilling and quite stimulating affair about the monster inside and out. And a celebration of human ingenuity. Take Shelter meets McGyver meets Im Keller. Good job. [75%] (2016-04-07)

With the Cloverfield brand comes a damn heavy burden. The original Cloverfield was able to combine the drama of the main characters with something big and terrifying that was located vaguely far away and at the same time all around. The identically named street has, as always, the believable Mary, in the form of the roaring John Goodman, as well as the question mark about what is hiding outside this time. However, with the main asset also comes the main obstacle, because we all suspect that something unexpected must happen in the final act, which doesn't fit too well with the previous course of events. The formula was only partially repeated, mainly thanks to the actors and a healthy dose of tension arising from the most ordinary situations. And yet the whole thing looks like two films stitched together. (2016-07-19)

It's a good movie, but I won't pretend I didn't expect more. In the most tense moments, debutant Dan Trachtenberg can't be as gritty and intense as he should, and in the middle section he fails to pinch the atmosphere the way, say, John Carpenter did in The Thing. There are occasional dead moments, and by the fifth time you're figuring out what's out there, or which of the characters is a nutcase, it starts to get tedious. Never, thankfully, so that boredom sets in, and thanks to John Goodman's impecable performance and Mary Elizabeth Winstead, who can do confident damsels in distress like few others, it's still a fun ride where you'll enjoy the twists and surprises. I just think it should have been made by someone who's done some movies before and knows that maintaining a suspenseful atmosphere when there are three people and four rooms on the screen doesn't quite work on its own and needs a little help. (2017-05-16)

A decent series pilot that has no business on the big screen. Logical holes in the narrative vs. powerful moments of surprise and an intense climax, which, however, is only as long as the climax of a TV series episode. A small movie to accompany Super 8, which also didn’t warrant much attention. Not as good as the larger and original Cloverfield (if we’re talking about J.J. Abrams’s projects for the same target audience). (2016-04-10)