Reasons not to be TOO excited about Cloverfield

Despite the headline of this post, I’m one of bazzilions who can’t wait to see what the heck is behind the destruction of New York City in Cloverfield. Is it
a) Godzilla, but with better CGI?
b) an angry, 30-foot lawyer? (Doesn’t that shadow in the poster look like a guy in a suit?)
c) giant clovers from outer space?

 The Movie Blog - one of my favourite movie blogs ever - has three reasons why we shouldn’t be too excited over the supposed pre-summer monster blockbuster:

 1) There’s nothing be be excited about.
The trailers have shown us nothing. Now, that might be a GOOD thing, and add to the experience in the theater when we see the monsters on the screen for the first time, and really get an idea of what the film is about for the first when we’re actually in the theaters. However, for now, I’ve got nothing to be pumped about. All I know is that there’s a big monster. That’s cool and all… but that alone isn’t enough to get me excited. I haven’t seen the monster. I don’t know what the movie is even about really… so why would I be pumped?

2) No Critic Reviews
I understand the rationale for this may go back to wanting to keep everything secret for the audience and increase the experience for those seeing it in the theaters for the first time… but history has shown that when a studio doesn’t let critics see a film in advance (by more than 2 or 3 days) it’s usually NOT a good sign. On top of that, without any positive word of mouth about the film, it’s hard to build my anticipation much for it. Turn your nose up at this reason all you want, but I think it’s a legitimate one.

3) It’s NOT JJ Abrams
It’s amazing how many people think JJ Abrams is directing this movie. He’s not. He didn’t even write it. The movie is being directed by Matt Reeves, and his only directing credits include the horrible “The Pallbearer” and a few episodes of Felicity (and a couple of single episodes of some other shows). Put people get pumped because it’s JJ Abrams! NO IT’S NOT! It’s being directed by a guy who only directed crap before. That’s not to say Cloverfield won’t be good… but why should my anticipation be high for a movie being directed by Matt Reeves???

I’ll add one more reason: The new trailer seems to inidicate that it prescribes to the shaky cam school of filmography. And I’ve hated it since NYPD Blue days (which is why I never watched the show). I barely tolerated in Bourne Ultimatum, when they thought that it was somehow grittier to shake the camera every 1.5 seconds. Why? Because if I wanted my vision to sway and shudder, I’d ride on a roller coaster. And the last thing I wanna do is pay RM10 to get a migraine while trying to make sense of what the heck I’m seeing on the screen, ‘k?

Some may think it’s just the trailer, or at least bits of the film that will be shaky cam, but the movie summary on Yahoo! movies debunks that:

Five young New Yorkers throw their friend a going-away party the night that a monster the size of a skyscraper descends upon the city. Told from the point of view of their video camera, the film is a document of their attempt to survive the most surreal, horrifying event of their lives.

Ok. (Takes a deep breath.)

Or it may turn out to be absolutely fantabulous and I’ll have a rip roaring time.

Let’s just hope this is not just great viral marketing at work.

Cross fingers.

Update: Here’s another guy who this the same thing:

The point is that all this buzz and hype doesn’t necessarily translate into a good movie experience, and that a lot of people might be letting themselves in for some serious disappointment. Think about it.