10 Cloverfield Lane

Director: Dan Trachtenberg
Starring: Mary Elizabeth Winstead, John Goodman, John Gallagher, Jr., Bradley Cooper, Suzanne Cryer
Running Time: 103 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

**Spoiler Warning: This review gives away key plot details, including the ending**

10 Cloverfield Lane raises a fascinating question for any critic or audience member who might happen to share my general opinion of it. And there will likely be more than a few. What happens when 90 percent of a movie is amazing, but the last 15 minutes are so misguided and disappointing that it threatens to completely overshadow whatever greatness came before? In this case, there was a lot of it, from the overall premise to the atmosphere and performances, it shares very little in common with 2008's monster movie Cloverfield, which was throwaway fun. This isn't. It's something much more than that for a good deal of its running time. With its production, eventual release and title somehow managing to stay shrouded in secrecy, few knew this "spiritual sequel" to Cloverfield was even coming, much less what it would be about, or who would star. But more importantly, that it could be done this well. That may be why the ending is so infuriating, but for me a bigger reason is that I was treated to two of my favorite actors going toe-to-toe for 90 minutes in the service of a story that came so close to doing them and viewers proud, only to drop the ball at the end.

What eventually occurs in no way diminishes those performances, but that any studio thought the idea of John Goodman as a survivalist holding people captive in an underground bunker wasn't scary enough on its own is mind boggling. On top of that, the script attaches enough moral implications and questions to what he's doing to make Rod Serling proud. What he wouldn't be so proud of is the ending. And it's not so much that I'm completely against what they did (though I still didn't care for it), but rather how. So here's my advice: When you get to about the hour and twenty-five minute mark, just hit "STOP" on your remote and turn the missing minutes into one of those old school "Choose Your Own Adventure" books where you pick the ending. There's little doubt whatever scenario you come up with will be more compelling than what the filmmakers ultimately chose. And the sad part is, ending notwithstanding, it's still one of the year's most compelling films.

When we first meet Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), she's packing up and leaving New Orleans after an argument with her fiancé Ben (voiced by Bradley Cooper). Distraught and distracted by news of major blackouts across the country, her car suddenly hits something and careens off the road. She awakens in a basement chained to a wall with an IV in her arm. The man holding her there is the burly, intimidating Howard Stambler (John Goodman), an obsessive survivalist who's built a fallout shelter under his farmhouse in the event of an attack, nuclear or otherwise. According to him, such an attack has already occurred, claiming the lives of nearly everyone outside who breathed the contaminated air.

Michelle and a man named Emmett (John Gallagher, Jr.) who forced himself into the bunker, are told by Howard that under no uncertain terms can they leave until the poisoned air's safe, which could be two years at the earliest. Not buying the far-fetched story and assuming she's been kidnapped by a crazed lunatic (with Howard's actions doing little to contradict that), a terrified Michelle makes plans to escape, but will need Emmett's help. Even as evidence mounts that there might be some truth to Howard's claims that the terror awaiting them outside is far worse than anything he can dish out.

Whether or not this was an intentional inspiration, the premise thematically draws certain comparisons to the classic Twilight Zone episode, "The Monsters are Due on Maple Street," in which panicked, desperate neighbors turn against each another when faced with an inexplicable, otherworldly threat. This is obviously a more contained version of that but the basic idea of how far people is willing to go and the amount of force they'll exert over others for self-preservation and survival are very similar.

Frightening in its timeliness, the screenplay cleverly and indirectly tackles 9/11 paranoia, terrorism and national security through the character of Howard, who's very much grounded in the world in which we now live. With his emphasis on law and order and second amendment rights it's not hard to picture him heading out to the polls on Election Day, packing heat and wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat. That's not a knock on Trump supporters, but rather a reasonable interpretation of this character based on the evidence, as well as a credit to Goodman's complex, forceful performance, which wildly vacillates between cold and detached and enthusiastically charismatic at the drop of a dime. It's because of him that we're able to get that clear a picture of the man, knowing exactly what he stands for and what pisses him off. The writers should also take some credit for concocting a character that really hits a cultural zeitgeist they couldn't have possibly known about when this went into pre-production.

What we're fuzzier on are the stoic, often humorless Howard's exact intentions, which is where so much of the film derives its suspense. The first inclination is that he's a psychotic kidnapper since his doomsday scenario doesn't add up on any logical level and he seems to care way too much about Michelle and Emmett attempting to leave (escape?). Then the clues drop. While certain details suggest Howard could actually be telling the truth, or at least some version of it, he's still a controlling terror with whom sharing any kind of space is dangerous. And yet, because he's played by Goodman, there are these moments of humanity where it seems as if he's legitimately invested in their well being as if they were his offspring. Evolving into this dysfunctional family, they eat together, play board games and watch movies as if Goodman were reprising his role as Dan Connor on Roseanne. The whole thing is so oddly fascinating and atypical of what you'd expect, even as tension continues to build to a fever pitch around Howard's personal history and reasons for holding them.

After turning in impressive, overlooked work The Thing remake, small, character-driven indies like Smashed, Faults and Alex of Venice and in TV's short-lived The Returned, I've always contended that Mary Elizabeth Winstead is only about a role or two off from occupying the same spot her Academy Award-winning Scott Pilgrim co-star Brie Larson currently does. This film probably won't get her there but it still represents the latest in a long line of inspiring choices that show off a dramatic range few know she possesses. In fact, most of the film and her performance recalls the first act of Room, which only makes it that much more frustrating when this eventually deviates from that psychological template.

Michelle is caught in a desperate, hopeless situation right off the bat, and the thrill comes in watching her try to process that, read it, and determine how to react.  The wheels are always turning, as she attempts to negotiate her way out of this predicament and nearly every scene Winstead shares with Goodman carries this consequential weight that nearly suffocates you with suspense. There's a an unbearably tense scene at the dinner table when director Dan Trachtenberg milks the suspense to such a point that the payoff literally caused me to jump. Gallagher's Emmett at first seems to be a major dope blindly following Howard, until his personality and motivations start figuring into the equation in surprising ways.

Considering its title and the fact this supposedly takes place in the same universe as Cloverfield, an argument could be made that we know what we're getting into. I'll cop to that, but still doesn't make the final minutes of the film any less ridiculous, disappointing or poorly executed. The script eventually has to lay all its cards on the table and reveal whether this is a straight-up abduction or some kind of cataclysmic event has actually occurred outside and Howard's holding her there for her own protection and his. Or maybe it's some kind of combination of both. In other words, she has to eventually escape and see what's out there. We know this and it's fine. But even if you're satisfied with THE BIG REVEAL, they don't milk the moments leading up to it nearly enough or execute it with the amount of finesse necessary to justify it. Despite some defending the decision, it's simply incongruous with the tone of the rest of the picture. While I can get on board with the thematic justification and how it relates Michelle's backstory and overcoming the cycle of her abuse, that doesn't excuse involving aliens in a narrative that was fairly grounded up to that point.  

Trachtenberg, making his feature debut, does a masterful job creating a dread-fueled atmosphere, but even he's saddled with a pretty thankless task in the final minutes. He responds with the cinematic equivalent of clubbing viewers over the head multiple times. But he's really just shooting a screenplay that's gone off the rails and it's likely the writers (which includes Whiplash director Damien Chazelle) were only carrying out the wishes of J.J. Abrams or the studio, who determined it was more important to continue building a "universe" that satiates the appetites of comic-con crowds than put the proper coda on an otherwise excellent film. It appears to have been nothing more than a marketing-driven decision, and while it happens all the time, that still doesn't make it any less creatively bankrupt.

If stretching for positives in the disastrous final minutes, Winstead's performance remains strong even during this nonsense and the revelation that Howard wasn't lying casts the character's previous actions in a slightly different light, causing you to likely appreciate Goodman's performance even more on repeated viewings. But I'd argue the same exact thing could have been accomplished in half a dozen different and better ways than what they eventually went with. Since it's unfair to rag on an ending this much without offering up a reasonable alternative, it would have been far more effective to have the final 15 minutes continue to build legitimate doubt as to what exactly happened, how many people survived, whether the air is breathable, or the planet even habitable.

The few minutes Michelle has to investigate before the movie turns into a special effects circus are really good and should have been stretched longer. Then, and only then, if they want to pull the trigger on the reveal (even one as silly as this), it would at least carry greater impact and they could quickly get to the end credits to preserve the integrity of what came before. Of course, had it just been a more believable threat that matched the tone of the rest of the film there would be no need for this discussion. But that wouldn't sell tickets. That's what's so frustrating about 10 Cloverfield Lane, which for most of its running time delightfully shares as little in common as possible with its predecessor. And why it's difficult assessing how much a botched ending should be counted against the overall viewing experience. One major flaw doesn't erase everything else, but it does somehow strangely make it all mean a little less than it should.     

The Best (And Worst) Movie Posters of 2008

While many (including myself) have been overheard complaining 2008 was a lackluster year for films, it was an incredible one for movie posters. Last year I couldn't even come up with 10 deserving posters to fill a list of the best, but this time around there was such a plethora of great choices that I had cheat and squeeze even more in there, plus come up with a couple of new special categories. I didn't give much thought to ranking them (not sure if I could) but my favorites are at the top, or rather the bottom. That I own three of the posters on here so far (which is a record for me in a single year) is a testament to just how strong the creative output was.

Even the bad posters were interesting in some way. As usual, "SIMPLE" was the rule of the day. Posters that used a simple, direct image to convey the spirit of the film (while still being visually interesting) fared the best. I've come to notice the ones that rely only on a big star's face (or in most cases their GIANT FLOATING HEAD) to sell the movie are always the worst. More has to be offered than just a big name and face to get attention. There were so many more posters I liked but the cream of the crop is represented below, as well as is the cream of the crap. Poster images provided by www.impawards.com



THE BEST...

Harold and Kumar Escape From Guantanamo Bay- NPH. On a unicorn. No more needs to be said. Hysterical. You know a poster's great when you could have left out the title of the film and we'd still know what it is.



College- Say what you want about the movie but they couldn't have possibly come up with a better image than this. For better or worse, we know exactly what we're getting. I love the simplicity and the tag line. It actually looks like something you'd see hanging in a dorm room, which was probably the point.



The Wrestler- When I first saw this poster I didn't like it at all. I thought it was boring and that banner hanging down on the right telling us to "WITNESS THE RESURRECTION OF MICKEY ROURKE" was an unnecessary distraction. But as the Awards season has worn on it's grown on me a little each time I see it, to the point now where I can't think of many posters this year as effective. What I thought was boring is instead elegantly simple, conveying the film's message in a single, striking image. And that quote on the right is something totally different than anything we've seen on a poster. It also uses a color scheme and font design you don't see everyday.



Synecdoche, New York- Charlie Kaufman written films are known for their big, crazy ideas so for his directorial debut it's appropriate the ambitious movie has one of the trippiest, most memorable one-sheets of the year. A life-size replica of New York City inside a warehouse? Huh? What? It got your attention. And no other poster looks like it. Love the blimp. And the critical blurb at the top has to be the longest I've ever seen on a poster. That took guts. It probably took that much space to even come close to explaining the movie. Just don't ask me to pronounce the title.



My Winnipeg- What's that guy doing out on the ledge? Who's the old lady? What's with the arrow pointing at him? Is the movie in black and white? I don't know anything about the film at all but this poster makes me want to find out. No lame photoshopping here. The unusual angle it was shot at is very cool as is what was done to the edges to make it look like an aged photograph. This one is as original as it gets.



Cloverfield- This is the first teaser poster for the film, before we knew anything, like the title who's starring in it, what it's about. And we don't need to. This striking image gives us all we need and want. It probably played a bigger role in the movie's success than many would like to admit.



Hell Ride- So maybe that "simple" rule can be thrown out the window for this one. Actually though, despite being very busy, it is simple. It lets us know simply that we're in for a grindhouse-like experience. Supposedly, it wasn't a very successful one from what I've heard but the poster at least got it right. I'm not sure how long I could look at it on the wall everyday without going blind but taken in a small dose it works exceptionally well.



The Bank Job- Move over Steve McQueen. This throwback design looks like it's right out of the 60's or 70's (which is when the movie's events take place). The off-white color and retro border are cool touches. One of the more underrated and understated posters of the year that also does the movie justice. Simple and effective.



Blindness- Very clever. Whoever thought of this deserves a raise. The eye chart idea is great enough on its own but having Julianne Moore reaching out for it from behind is a creepy effect. Not only the only poster on this list to use the transparent style (I'm sure you know what the other one is) but it's awesome nonetheless and would get someone who knows nothing about the film interested quickly.



Burn After Reading- No one will accuse this retro-throwback poster of being the most original of the year but you can't tell me it isn't slick and eye-catching. It's got that Hitchcock vibe going, which works and perfectly presents the tone of the film. The other character-centric versions weren't nearly as interesting as this.



Gran Torino- Talk about a picture being worth a thousand words. He's Clint Eastwood. He's cranky. He's 75. And he can still kick your ass.



The Dark Knight (Take Your Pick)- The Dark Knight had a wide variety of posters to choose from this year but these were by far the most memorable, and brilliant. I know very few people who don't own AT LEAST one of them. How fitting that a film that was in many ways a victim of its own expectations had them raised to even more unreasonable levels when these teasers came out. I don't think any film could have lived up to them. Speaking of which:



Funny Games- If the actual film were as good as the poster, Michael Haneke would be preparing an Oscar acceptance speech right now. I liked the film a lot but wouldn't blame anyone who walked away from that film expecting more on the basis of this unsettling, terrifying image. On the other hand, you could reasonably argue that the movie was as uncomfortable and polarizing as the image. And look what they did with the credits. Forget about this being the best poster of the year, this should rank among the best of the decade.



THE WORST...

Changeling- Help!!! Angelina's going to eat me!



Seven Pounds- Who cares what its about? Will Smith's in it! I do appreciate that the studio going to great lengths to conceal the plot in trailers and commercials but unfortunately, that tactic doesn't play nearly as well in print. There is such a thing as too much restraint.

Body of Lies- Here's a movie whose poster somehow actually lives up to its lazy, generic direct-to-DVD title. Of all the posters on this list this is one that most make me want to flee any theater showing the film. It's like the designers gave up and said, "Well, the movie's gonna suck anyway." The others featuring Crowe and DiCaprio solo were even worse.



The Women- It takes a lot of work to make a group of reasonably talented and attractive actresses look this foolish and ugly in a poster. This features so much airbrushing it would make Maxim covers look like mug shots. And is that Annette Bening? I swear I couldn't even tell. It's also a cluttered, cut-and-paste mess. If the movie's as bad as this suggests I'm scared to death.

My Best Friend's Girl- You know it's bad when even Dane Cooke himself commented on his blog how embarrassing it is. Less a poster and more an ad for how to abuse Photoshop. Apparently, Kate Hudson now not only stars in bad movies, but bad posters as well. Her almost equally awful Fool's Gold poster just missed the list.



AND THE WEIRDEST...

Frost/Nixon- Homicidal maniac David Frost sets his sights on future Presidential candidate Bob Dole in this taut, psychological horror/thriller from 1985. Okay, not exactly, but can you blame me? I wasn't sure whether this belonged in the "best" or "worst" so I just put it here. If they were looking to recapture the time period during which the events of the film took place (even if they're a decade late) then this might be the most brilliant poster of the year. If not, then it's among the funniest I've ever seen. So either way, it's a win. The photo and style of print makes it look like one of those cheesy VHS covers from the 80's. And how about Langella's C. Montgomery Burns pose? Hopefully this will be the DVD cover art, or better yet, just release it on VHS! But what I really want to see is a film set in the 80's with this poster on someone's wall in the background. I might have to own this, except I worry after looking at it for a week the joke will get old. Taken on its own merits it's just a hilarious misrepresentation of the film but when you consider said film is one of the biggest, most serious Oscar contenders of the year then it suddenly seems a whole lot more ridiculous. Don’t know what they were thinking but I'm glad they did it.




Valkyrie- Ocean's 14...with Nazis!



BEST FAKE POSTERS (These Aren't Real But Should Be)
The Dark Knight Returns- If Nolan decides to go for one more sequel he could do a lot worse than looking to this poster for inspiration. It had me fooled. And better than a few of the best ones above.
(Source: Cinematical)



Wonder Woman- I never seriously entertained the idea that Megan Fox could be a viable candidate for the role...until seeing this. Now THAT'S a good Photoshop job.
(Source: www.wonder-who.com)

Cloverfield

Director: Matt Reeves
Starring: Michael Stahl-David, T.J. Miller, Jessica Lucas, Lizzy Caplan, Mike Vogel, Odette Yustman
Running Time: 84 min.
Rating: PG-13

***1/2 (out of ****)

It's debatable whether it actually helps to know as little as possible going into Cloverfield. Shrouded in secrecy for months leading up to its release and at the center of a huge viral marketing campaign, the studio went to great lengths to make sure very little was leaked about the film. Just about all we knew was that it was set in New York City and it involved some kind of monster attack. Details about what this monster was, where it came from and especially how it looked were guarded closest of all.

On one hand this is great because it creates an element of shock and surprise when you see the film. On the other hand it isn't because when anything is hyped this endlessly and we essentially know nothing, you run risk of audiences being disappointed with whatever they see. Just ask George Lucas (although that's a little different because his Star Wars prequels did truly suck). Hype or not, internet or not, Cloverfield doesn't suck at all. In fact, it's very good and a true original as far as monster movies go.

After finally seeing it I've determined the most ridiculous complaint leveled against the film is that the shaky hand-held camera is annoying and nauseating Without it we'd really have no movie and nothing would distinguish it from any other run-of-the-mill monster movie other than the fact that the acting is a little stronger. But also, had the film not been shot this way, we probably wouldn't be hearing criticisms that the film evokes "9/11 imagery." It's okay to have New York City under attack, just please don't make it look real! This does evoke imagery of that day, but it's unavoidable. I'm convinced any disaster movie set in New York would, but this just LOOKS worse because of how it's shot.

We already, for better or worse, have gotten United 93 and World Trade Center so to complain about this now seems a little silly. I hesitate calling this movie frighteningly realistic because it deals with a premise so far out there, but that's just what it is. The people seem real. The situation seems real. And that's why it's scary. The way it's filmed and directed lets you feel like you're an eyewitness to something horrifying and enables you to envision yourself in these characters' places, maybe wondering how you'd handle it.

Rob Hawkins (Michael Stahl-David) has just taken a new job in Japan and his brother Jason (Mike Vogel) and girlfriend Lily (Jessica Lucas) are throwing him a surprise going away party. Rob's longtime friend Beth (Odette Yustman), who he slept with weeks earlier shows up with a date making for an extremely awkward situation. His best friend Hud (T.J.Miller) is given a camera and the task of recording everyone's final goodbyes to Rob. He very reluctantly agrees, unaware that he'll be recording much more than just a couple of well wishing testimonials that night. He's our eyes for most of the rest of the film as we see what's unfolding onscreen through his hand-held camera. He mostly uses this opportunity to goof off and flirt with his crush Marlena (Lizzy Caplan), who barely knows he exists. Rob and Beth argue about their "relationship" and she storms out of the party.

It's here where I wished I knew even less about the film than I did going in because what happens next is truly jarring, especially in the context of the friendly home video we've been watching thus far. Something attacks the city and that's just about all I can reveal plot-wise without spoiling anything. It's big, it's nasty and no one knows where it came from.. Rob's caught in a life and death situation with Jason, Lily, Hud and Marlena and it clear all he wants to do is get to mid-town to find Beth.

It's almost impossible not to compare Cloverfield with The Blair Witch Project, one of its obvious inspirations. Where the two movies diverge, however, is in their use of the hand held camera as a storytelling device. In Blair Witch it was essentially a gimmick used to convince us what we're watching was real. This does that, but takes it a few steps further. It cleverly uses the camera to incorporate flashbacks of Rob and Beth together, as the night's events are accidentally recorded over a day they spent together the previous month. As a result, the footage shows up intermittently during the film giving us a better sense of who they are. Hud, who's behind the camera also has a distinctive personality, which somehow finds a way to shine through in the way the film is shot, which in turn influences how we see events.

I can't recall once during the film where I stopped and thought to myself how creative the director was or how clever the dialogue. It really seemed as if no one was directing this and it had no script, which is probably the highest compliment of all. Despite his name being all over the project in the media, Lost creator J.J. Abrams is actually the producer while Matt Reeves, whose previous credits include Under Siege 2: Dark Territory and The Pallbearer, is behind the camera. He invisibly directs this with near-perfection.

Of course this has a draw back too in that an 84 minute home movie that doesn't play as if it's been edited at all will have the tendency to drag its feet at times no matter how suspenseful. If this went on any longer than an hour and a half it probably would have been too much but at this length it's just right. Reeves is also able to salvage a PG-13 rating believably because if something's too gory or gruesome to show he doesn't have to. Hud can just miss it. He's not supposed to be a professional cameraman. If there's a conversation that we're not supposed to see or hear, then we won't. Reeves can do all of this believably without us ever feeling as if we're being manipulated.

This especially comes in handy with the monster since he can take a Jaws-like approach to its unveiling, giving it to us visually in small doses throughout the film, only increasing the terror and suspense. The special effects and CGI don't become as huge an issue or as noticeable as they would be in your typical blockbuster because this sloppy style of filming distracts you from it. The execution of this technique is very, very clever and not something we've seen in a film of this magnitude before. While the ending feels slightly anti-climactic, I'm hard–pressed to think of a more satisfying one. A couple of alternate finishes are included on the disc, none of which vary much at all from the theatrical one.

It can't be overstated how wise a decision it was on Abrams' and Reeves' parts to cast, other than maybe Vogel, virtual unknowns in these roles. The performances are fine all-around, with the strongest coming from Caplan. Had what unfolds at the 20-minute mark not happened I still would have wanted to spend the entire running length of the film with these characters even if they were just sitting around the apartment talking.

Unlike Blair Witch, which was concerned primarily with using the camera to unspool its mythology, this film lets us get to know the characters and eventually come to care what happens to them. That they're fresh faces, not big stars helps speed along the process even if some of the actors resemble more famous names. Caplan and Yustman could pass as doubles for Zooey Deschanel and Jennifer Connelly, respectively. Both are also naturals and the camera loves them…even if it's a shaky hand held one. Michael Stahl-David is likable and believable as the lead. Because of the naturalness of all the performances you have to believe a lot of Drew Goddard's script was improvised on the spot. The actors provide a spontaneous feeling we probably wouldn't have gotten from more established actors, who out of habit would have turned in more mannered work. This proves that sometimes it doesn't pay to necessarily go for the most talented performers, but instead those best suited for the specific material.

It's tough to determine whether Cloverfield is a movie that plays better on the big screen or small. It feels like a giant event movie that needs to be experienced in a loud theater to fully absorb its scope, yet the direct immediacy of its technique lends itself to satisfying home viewing as well. Having not seen it on the big screen though, I couldn't accurately tell you how much is lost in translation, if anything. It's also hard to determine how well this will stand up on repeated viewings since The Blair Witch Project, hailed as masterful upon its release, now plays like nothing more than a clever stunt. There seems to be more going on here, but it'll take some time to tell just how much. If nothing else, its eventful release and box office success came as a huge relief during the notorious moviegoing doldrums of January. It's no surprise that a sequel is being planned, as unnecessary as it is.

Some may feel uncomfortable with the way the film brings to the surface 9/11 fears, anxiety and memories. Collapsing New York City skyscrapers and a decapitated Statue of Liberty can only bring one thing to mind and Abrams had to know that. He probably also knows that day has already been seeping into Hollywood whether we like it or not. But what is film, anyway, but our lives adapted on the big screen for display? If they ever stopped being that, I'd want to quit watching them. It's time to admit that Cloverfield has bothers so many people because it so effectively taps into that powerless, scary feeling of not knowing what's going on.