
And speaking of Cloverfield, I'm seeing it a second time this evening and will hold off offering anything beyond my "Dude!" assessment of yesterday until post-second-screening... except to say, I found it extremely satisfying, it's precisely what I wanted it to be, and.... Dude!
--- A couple of Sundance points o' interest - First, AICN has a review of Brad Anderson's Transsiberian up, and it's not totally a rave but it does manage to include a sentence that explodes all my nerve-endings with glee:
"This is Emily Mortimer’s movie. She is the lead without a doubt..."
Greatest sentence ever? You be the judge.

.
3 comments:
That.
Is.
The.
Greatest.
Sentence.
Ever.
[spasms]
Re: Cloverfield, I agree with you 100%. I saw it on Friday, and it was very satisfying. I even loved the viral marketing. It wasn't perfect but certainly better than most of the crap produced by Hollywood these days.
I didn't dive too hard into the viral stuff, I was afraid I'd have info-overload going into the film, but I did read up on a bunch afterwards, about the deep-sea-drilling and underwaters rifts and baby creatures and soda companies, and it's all entertainingly loony. But I thought the film stood fine on its own without all that stuff. I keep reading people complaining about the lack of explanations or origin material within the film itself, to which I say HOOEY, I couldn't be more tired of that bull-crap, and loved not being given any of it within the actual film. I don't want explanations; I just wanted to be strapped into a "Non-Stop Thrill Ride" and I really felt like Cloverfield delivered on that front. I can't wait to see it again tonight.
Post a Comment