Action / Adventure / Horror / Sci-Fi / Thriller

Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 77%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 68%
IMDb Rating 7 10 319305


Uploaded By: OTTO
Downloaded 127,480 times
October 31, 2012 at 12:04 AM



Lizzy Caplan as Marlena Diamond
Jessica Lucas as Lily Ford
Odette Annable as Beth McIntyre
Ben Feldman as Travis
720p 1080p
650.07 MB
23.976 fps
1hr 25 min
P/S 3 / 31
1.20 GB
23.976 fps
1hr 25 min
P/S 6 / 44

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by CSBurningDestiny 1 / 10

Sturdiest Hand-held Camera Ever!

... I do not believe that digital camera survived a nuke. I'm sorry, there you go. That was the final nail in the coffin for this movie, it just heaps one immersion-breaking sequence of events after another.

So, let's count off:

Cloverfield stops just short of carving 'all the characters in this movie die!' into your forehead in the first 40 seconds of the movie, making it impossible to feel any sort of emotional attachment to them? Check.

Magically-appearing army which arrives roughly TEN MINUTES into the monster attack despite the fact that one of the main bridges into Manhattan was destroyed not thirty-seconds earlier? Check.

Monster can't be hurt by weapons? Check. This is forgivable, it's a trope of all giant monster movies. Most make some attempt to explain it... in Cloverfield, they just assume you'll go: "Oh, of course that doesn't work. It IS a giant monster, after all."

Monster drops off little baby monsters (in this case, parasites) that only serve to pad the movie and give the filmmakers an excuse to film someone (literally) exploding off-camera with no explanation as to WHY said character exploded because of the bite of a little monster? Check.

Exiting the subway into a conveniently-placed Army hospital? Check.

Baby monster bite that, while severe, doesn't slow down any of the caste UNTIL the poorly telegraphed "I feel a little dizzy" followed by the above-referenced character explosion? Check.

Skyscraper improbably leaning against another skyscraper without either of them collapsing? Check.

Girl survives roughly six hours with a rebar spike through her shoulder without bleeding to death... OK, this one's plausible. People have survived weirder, and the rebar MIGHT have kept her from bleeding to death.

Girl is capable of running not once, but twice, roughly ten minutes after being REMOVED from said rebar? Without being slowed down because of blood-loss, pain, nausea, or any other reason? Check.

Monster pulls a 'Dragonball Z' and gets back up despite lots of bombs and a huge cloud of smoke? Check.

Helicopter crashes in central park, and only the three main characters survive? Check.

Guy and his girl fiend wind up together at the end, complete with useless and weepy Blair Witch "I'm scared, why is this happening to me?!" dialog? Check.

Camera Footage survives a NUCLEAR ATTACK, despite the fact that a nuke's EMP will still erase digital footage even if it IS protected by a flimsy central park bridge? Check.

... and that's the whole movie. Seriously. Every scene contained something needlessly immersion-breaking which, coupled with the nausea-inducing camera-work made for a decidedly poor movie.

If given the choice of being bitten by one of the little monster-lice from Cloverfield or watching the actual movie, I'd take being bitten. At least then, you'll only feel sick for about half an hour.

Reviewed by Rumsfield 1 / 10


I will admit, the marketing scheme behind this awfulness was clever. I mean, I like a good thrill ride monster movie. The Creature From the Black Lagoon piqued my curiosity as a youngster as I marveled at the brilliance of trying to understand something that has no explanation. However, it's hard to have this curiosity, no matter how intriguing the monster is, when the script is so tired its in a coma.

Yes, the monster is cool. No, the stupid hand-held camera gimmick didn't bother me. Yes, the special effects are great and at times I did find myself in awe of the spectacle on the screen as it does seem real, but the movie itself is so, so, so dumb. At any moment I felt comfortable to leave to use the restroom as I knew exactly what I was going to miss. The plot was a paint by numbers and I would have loved even a touch of Bob Ross to fill the blanks, but no originality whatsoever.

First they steal the overdone Hollywood bit about love. "Dude, if you love her, tell her." Response: "I can't tell her, unless a mutant alien/ocean creature tries to expunge the city, only then will I try and make my move." Why have this? Why not make the story the monster? Really, who cares about these characters? Who cares about Rob's job in Japan? It's flimsy? Why have it? The beginning clearly leads on that the camera is found, which means they all die. Standard operation of introducing characters that we shouldn't care about.

Second, they decide to steal a scene from a much better monster movie The Descent. "Let's try night vision on the camera." And this is in no way as scary as the movie that did it better. The Descent works better in every faction of story telling. It forces claustrophobia as it whispers the insanity and the entire film works as a metaphor for diving deep into the darkness of one's existence and summoning demons, ones we can't see coming (which is why I think those monsters were blind). Cloverfield does none of this. It's a, where can we run to next? saga. A 'B' movie. A well shot 'B' movie.

Third we have the comic relief one liner guy holding the camera. But in true fashion of a bad movie, he's not funny, just annoying. A few people in my viewing clapped when he was eaten. I love LOST. I think it's the best show on TV, but the writer here has proved that being a great psychological writer for the little screen does not translate to comedy. Bad Robot productions should hire one guy with a sense of humor. They may need him at some point. Hud's pinnacle of wit was "That's terrible" when he gets a good shot of the monster. Followed closely by, "That's terrible too" when we see when of its young-lings a few seconds later. Brilliant... improv? I can only guess the script consisted of locations and not so much dialogue since this boner had most of the words in the movie, words that seemed spontaneously driven from someone wait listed at community college. Horrible. I'm surprised he didn't utter, "That's terrible cubed" before he was engorged upon. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Fourth, we have the killer/villain/monster has one last leap. Yes, we knew the helicopter was going down since they find the camera in Central Park. "We killed him" Hud proclaims, just before the monster elevates and slaps the helicopter to the ground. This is scary, why? Oh, it's not scary, and I find the idea of a thing like this really existing more logical than any of those bozos surviving the crash in the park.

Fifth, they've stolen from every Stephen King novel ever, because King should always have chapters taken out, and this movie should have been an hour long. Do we really need to see them walk up 57 flights of stairs and then back down and then bank up and then and then and then and then.... yes we do. Otherwise they don't have enough for a feature length movie. So trite and boring and not fascinating. Which is why the gimmick of a hand held camera was needed. Otherwise, they may actually need to give the characters some arc, have some purposeful shots of the monster, maybe create a reason for what it is and why it's there and, uh-oh, give it some originality. For anyone who thinks this movie is original it is probably because you are under 24 and either naive to creativity or just haven't seen any worthwhile movies. I wanted to like this I did, I really did. It just wasn't good. I can respect it, as I respect all movies that are made. It was well crafted and edited and the effects were amazing, but so what? All movies now have great effects. The Fantastic Four movies are not good, but their effects rock. War of the Worlds was awful, but I thought those things really came out of the ground. Effects and production don't make a movie. Not anymore. T-2, Jurassic Park, Men in Black, those movies were pioneers to FX being a character along with brilliant film-making. Now it is expected. Since it is expected there, I expect more from the story. This isn't it. If I were trapped in hell and I had a choice to watch either Cloverfiled or One Miss Call over and over, I'd pick One Miss Call. At least its badness is funny, which gives it some merit. Cloverfield is just bad. Textook, trite, clichéd, not smart, overdone, not scary, bad. Not as bad as Mission Impossible 2, but pretty darn close.

Reviewed by dseiden5 9 / 10

Breath of fresh air

It was nice to finally watch movie that didn't seem like anything I'd ever seen before. This, much like Spielberg's "War of the Worlds" and "Children of Men", completely immerses you in this incredible situation with absolutely no knowledge to comfort you. It's very disorienting, which adds to the experience; you never figure out what the hell is going on but you're so into survival that you put it past you. You're placed with a bunch of characters whom you get to know and eventually must join in their frenzied search for a friend while being subjected to some horrifying imagery and new threats.

The effects look great and realistic thanks to the hand-held camera, which isn't too bad-looking if you manage to get a seat further from the screen. The filmmakers came up with some really great creature designs that were menacing yet very much original. If you're bound to be upset over seeing a movie with a lack of music, then stay for the credits, during which a fantastic suite of music composed by Michael Giacchino titled "Roar! (Cloverfield Theme)" plays.

All in all, a fantastic time at the movies. A little more background on the monster would be nice, though the absence of this information is intentional. Everyone in the theater was rooting for a sequel; maybe a second set of footage is found elsewhere? Or perhaps there is more the the viral marketing -- what exactly were Slusho and Tagruato? Also be prepared to suspend some disbelief, but considering the movie is about a monster destroying New York City, that shouldn't be too difficult.

Read more IMDb reviews


Be the first to leave a comment