
On this MLK day I’ve decided to leave the important topics to Oprah, and instead delve into a topic that i’m sure is plaguing the majority of my dwindling readership: “Should I or should I not give a crap about Cloverfield?”. Basically it depends on how big of an ass you want me to be. Because I guess what it really boils down to is how you review movies. If i were to compare the original godzilla with cloverfield, I would have to take into account godzilla’s social commentary, warning of the dangers of nuclear weapons and of the threat humanity poses to itself. In the movie, godzilla himself is a metaphor for man’s unleashed destructive potential. So despite all it’s cheezy guys in monster suits, and horrible japanese actors, the movie has a message at it’s core, and an important one at that.
Cloverfield, however, has none of this. It is a very visceral and intense movie, however, and keeps you at the edge of your seat. It does an incredible job of being a suspenseful movie. however, as far as message or meaning concern, the only discernable ones are about not being dicks to your friends, etc.. in the overall meaning department, i find it to be seriously lacking in scope.
So if I compare them side by side, godzilla stands as a piece of social commentary, and cloverfield stands as a movie that you will buy used out of the $4.99 bin at blockbuster 2 years from now. Was cloverfield a bad movie? no. It was an intense action movie, and if you were able to get past the shaky-cam style film making, it was an entertaining experience. Will it win an oscar for anything other than special effects? I certainly doubt it. Which one is the better movie? It all depends on what you value as a viewer. In my opinion, godzilla beats it hands-down. I’ll take a moral over raw suspense any day. But that’s just me
Am I a film snob? Yes. But I bet you get over it.