10 Cloverfield Lane

The name really screwed it. Throughout the film, the experience from an excellent chamber thriller drama is disrupted by the world “Cloverfield”; you know what kind of reveal this will eventually lead to. And when it gets there, what follows is disappointment, because the connection with the original film is really only on paper. If the film was called Independence Day 2, it would’ve been the same, if not better. A weak four. (04/06/2016)

The sophisticated story structure that releases just enough information to keep the viewer entertained is textbook level. Thanks to the fact that Johnny Be Good(man) can be equally terrifying as he is a nice guy, and that there’s always something to look at (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). Lots of powerful moments and cruel twists. Overall, it seems like a costly beginning to a series that we’ll probably never see. The finale works, even if you have an inkling of what is in store, but sweet ignorance is again more preferable. (07/30/2016)

Something between Take Shelter and War of the Worlds. Interesting in the characters and their confrontations and development. Also atmospheric, suffocating and immersive. But I'm not sure whether not know what the hell is going in inside or outside is for the better. All the while, though, you pray that they mostly don't get both at once and mentally beg for a sophisticated denouement. But it ends in such a way that it looks like there’d be at least five more episodes. John Goodman is by far the best thing about the whole film. (06/10/2016)

A very current elaboration of a classic disaster theme, which in many respects continues freely in the footsteps of Spielberg's War of the Worlds. Goodman's character is not overshot in any way, and comes off to me exactly like an obese man in survival documentaries - a perverse mixture of rationality, vigilance and paranoia, with a hint something devious. It was a good decision to use highly subjective detail, low depth of field and sharpened sound. Sometimes it suffocates and cramps very pleasantly, sometimes it planes a thick string too ostentatiously and bets on "approximately motivated" twists as well as instructively reaped motifs. But as a whole, it doesn't embarrass the Cloverfield concept; on the contrary, despite all the modeling, the result is a thrilling and quite stimulating affair about the monster inside and out. And a celebration of human ingenuity. Take Shelter meets McGyver meets Im Keller. Good job. [75%] (04/07/2016)

When looking back, the film doesn't seem as clever as it did while I was watching it. Its screenplay tempts us to expect some kind of mystifying twist, similar to Sexmission, and meanwhile... The film is interesting in that, during its runtime, it changes genres, similar to a chameleon changing colors. It's not about intertwining different genre elements, it simply functions as a pure horror for a while, then transforms into a psychological drama of an isolated group of people, later on it becomes an authentic science fiction, and elsewhere it turns into a thriller about encountering a deranged criminal. By the way, the main heroine is really unlucky. Ending up in the company of the biggest lunatic in the district after a serious car accident is not fair at all. All three actors deliver an appropriate performance. Mary Elizabeth Winstead in the role of a brave girl who doesn't want to sell her life for free is likable and appeals to me more than in a similarly constructed character in the prequel The Thing. The real treat, however, is the presence of John Goodman in the role of an eccentric property owner with peculiar hobbies. This is an immensely gratifying type of character and John Goodman thoroughly enjoys it. Although after the final quarter-hour, when 10 Cloverfield Lane definitively reveals its true colors and the illusion of sophistication dissolves, the impression slightly decreases, I will ultimately give it 4 stars, as no matter what genre it belongs to, it precisely provides the emotions it intends to. Overall impression: 75%. (07/09/2017)