'Cloverfield': Roundtable day two

Greetings! The Slusho has been passed to me, so to speak, for the second portion of our Cloverfield Roundtable. (And thank you, Andy, for the lovely introduction.)
My first exposure to the mysterious shaky-cam teaser was, like Andy, during the trailers preceding Transformers. I had heard vague rumblings about J.J. Abrams’ latest secret project but I had no idea what it was going to be about, nor did I make any attempt to research any rumors about it. Why? Because I like being surprised.
It is a rare treat when a movie surprises me with its plot and conclusion so I do my best to avoid any potential spoilers, and that includes watching beyond the first full trailer (the more trailers I watch, the better I can identify where a particular scene will probably appear – especially irritating when they put in clips from the last 15 minutes of the movie). I can’t tell you how many times I’ve come out of a movie disappointed because I felt like I’d already seen the whole thing in 30-second to two-minute increments. What I find most intriguing about Cloverfield is just how seemingly little information can be gathered from what’s out there and I dig the fact that I’ll be flying relatively blind when I see it. Never underestimate the power of mystery.
I haven’t dug as deep into the connected Web sites as Ryan and Andy, but curiosity finally got the best of me and I have visited the Slusho site (the official commercial they feature is one of the raddest things I’ve ever seen) and poked around a bit in other ways. I’ve found out some more bits and pieces but I gratefully still feel spoiler-free. Viral marketing can do a lot to enhance the feel of a film and I think Abrams and his crew are doing a great job with dropping subtle little clues here and there for those keen enough to pick up on them without ruining anything.
But is it too much mystery? There will always be expectations, especially from someone like J.J., and I wonder if he’ll be able to deliver in a way that will satisfy the majority of people who’ve become so invested in the film. Maybe Andy and Ryan can give their insight on this as well.
As for the shaky-cam style of filming…eh. It can be effective but there’s a fine balance between awesomely off-balance and “What the heck is going on here?” – I’m looking at you, fight scenes in The Bourne Supremacy and Elektra. It seems to me that there’s enough steadiness to it, particularly during the important bits, that whole movie won’t be like riding in a boat driven by a drunken celebrity. I also think it adds a lot to the atmosphere to the chaos, confusion and struggle…and I don’t know if Cloverfield would be as enjoyable if it was shot like a normal movie. If it were, would people be as excited about it? Plus, I don’t think I want to see that exploding lady up close…

About Tamara Brooks