Cloverfield (2007) vs Silent Light (Stellet Licht) (2007)

This week the Monday Evening Political Slot combines a du(a?)(e?)l review, offering two for the price of one. With political commentary in tow. So, who will win the battle of these two behemoths? And, just as importantly, why?



Cloverfield first...

Much hyped and brilliantly marketed, this J.J. Abrams vehicle, directed by Matt Reeves and starring a bunch of unknowns, centres on an attack on New York. But by who? Or what?

Now, I'm afraid I can't really review this without revealing what or who the mystery attacker is, so if you don't know look away now and you'll just have to come back to find out the punchline of this political slot when you've seen it. Anyway, the movie was released on friday and it is now widely known what this attacker is.

It's a hacking great monster.

Anyway, this is a truly revolutionary film. Not really in the way that it uses handheld cameras and provides a first hand perspective, nor in regards to the subject material, characterisation, editing or direction. What then? It's difficult to pinpoint and describe exactly, but it's essentially the combination of incredible realism and utterly stunning visuals the likes of which have never been joined before to such incredible effect. It's a disaster movie crossed with sci-fi, but it is handled so perfectly I genuinely walked out of the cinema and drove home casting a wary eye towards the horizon in case a hacking great monster there lurked. Now, I would personally say that a fictional film starring a huge CGI creature which has this effect on a viewer deserves a huge amount of kudos. Never before have I witnessed the normal and everyday so dramatically collapsed by something that should absolutely, on the face of it, be absurd. Unbelievable. Could never have imagined a monster movie could ever make anyone feel like this. I expected to enjoy it (on the same kind of level I enjoyed War of The Worlds say) but I never expected this. I cannot wait to see whether it will stand up to a second viewing. I might even go back and watch it again before it finishes its run at the cinema.

It gets extra credit because, as I say, there is nothing spectacular about the basic plot, or narrative (it's a very basic disaster movie set-up) and the performances are no more than okay. They don't need to be anything more than that, however, as the dialogue takes care of that. One further aspect worthy of commendation is the very original way there is absolutely nothing (except one tantalising hint in the last shot) of monster backstory. Perhaps that's why it works so damn well.

A word of warning. This will split audiences straight down the middle. Some will simply hate this and find it laughable and part of me can see why, though I will not be able to accept the reasons for it. For 85 minutes you are living in a city attacked by a mysterious creature and it is completely believable and totally absorbing as a result and nothing will change that for me. Also, the camera work (literally) nearly made me sick, but that was all part of the fun for me. It won't be for others. All reservations aside, this gets a provisional:

A+



Now, Silent Light. This is a slow-burning drama, set amongst the medieval German speaking Mennonite community in Mexico, centred around the philandering Johan's (Cornelio Wall) extra marital affair with Esther (Miriam Toews). The film begins with a 7 minute long shot of the sun coming up and ends with a 7 minute long shot of the sun going down.

Could any two movies be more different?

No, and on two levels.

Silent Light represents everything that is bad about film making. It is an overly-indulgent, pretentious, vacuous, garbled, heartless piece of nonsense. It is a character piece without characters, an artistic piece devoid completely of any artistic beauty. The director, Carlos Reygadas, is the "enfant terrible" of Arthouse Cinema, apparantly. Perhaps it's because he makes such shockingly bad films like this which turn people away from the genuis that can be Arthouse Cinema.

Reygadas is clearly of the opinion that he has a real gift for cinematography. Who else could be so arrogant so as to presume his or her viewers will be completely captivated by 7 minute long shots of the rising and setting sun? But someone needs to tell Reygadas and his cinematographer Alexis Zabe that photography is about more than pointing a camera at something that appears beautiful. You still have to show the audience why it's beautiful, and therein lies the art. Reygadas possesses none of this skill, even though he clearly presumes he has it in abundance. He would do well to look at Roger Deakins' much lauded (by us!) efforts in The Assassination of Jesse James. Here images mean something and represent the larger, bleaker, troubled world they (in totality) capture. There is nothing of that here, even though Reygadas' film aims at a similar darkness.

The performances are okay, but the characters they portray are so utterly lifeless, unengaging and ultimately one dimensional that those performances scarcely matter. This just drags and drags and drags. Appauling. It never for one moment allows you to forget that you're watching a film.

It is not the none thing among arthouse lovers to say that slow, ethereal, (supposedly) thoughtful, 'artistic' films like this can be terrible. So, take it from me, they can be. If you don't believe me, go sit through this. I dare you.

F

So, then, it's pretty obvious which film wins the battle! This has been interesting for me, because I (obviously) did not deliberately go and see these two films with a post like this in mind, they just came to unexpectedly represent something that is constantly on my mind when I see and discuss film.

The typical response of arthouse fans to people like me who post reviews like this of such a 'glorious' film as Silent Light is that I just didn't get it, I'm not on the same plane, as witnessed by my hopelessly high mark for Cloverfield. To that snobbish reposte (which I'm sure most of us have heard at one time or another) my reply is this:

The true 'art' of film comes in collapsing the unreal into the real. The ironic thing about this, I guess, is that it is usually character driven arthouse films which are best credited for doing so, and yet a blockbusting monster flick can manage to do it so much more successfully than an artistic slow burner. And that says as much about the acheivement of Cloverfield as it does the abject failure of Silent Light. It is not a film's provenance that matters, only its result.

Cloverfield

The much hyped Blair Witch style monster movie opened in America two weekends ago and promptly took the number one slot in the box office charts. It then proceeded to drop by 76% the following weekend which is just about, although not quite, an all-time record. So either all the Coverfield fanboys had scrambled to see it on opening weekend and there were none left who hadn't seen it the week after, or word of mouth was pretty abysmal.

Maybe it was a little of both. I can certainly understand the word of mouth being poor. The first comment I heard upon leaving was "that's an hour and a half of my life I'll never have back". There were groans of disappointment when it finished. No clapping. No murmers of approval. I think you get a sense of how an audience is gauging a film when you're there and I certainly didn't sense an audience on the edge of their seats.

For those who have no idea, Cloverfield is filmed from the perspective of a group of young friends celebrating the imminent departure of one of their buddies, who's off to Japan. The first half hour sees us become acquainted with what'll become a group of 5 through video tributes filmed by Hud, whose been given the job of documenting the entire night. Around 30 minutes in a series of explosions over downtown Manhattan disturbs their celebrations and causes them to leave the apartment. Whilst outide they witness what seems to be a meteor or something similar crashing down the street, but which then appears to be the head of the Statue of Liberty. In the ensuing panic our friends get broken up and we follow a group of 5 of them, one of whom is Rob - the guy who was off to Japan, and the person they all look to for leadership.

Comparisons with Blair Witch are pretty reasonable since, although the set-up is completely different, the style of each film and the marketing of both has trodden a similar path. Not being a fan of The Blair Witch Project I have to say Cloverfield surpasses the only real notable hand-held movie to precede it in every regard. However some of that wouldn't be too difficult. The quality of acting is better here, which is a little like saying it would be better to go blind in one eye rather than two. They both suck, one's just not as bad. Largely though this is very well executed and there is one very notable department in which Cloverfield far outstrips its counterpart and that is the quality of the direction, which here is very well - in places superbly - executed, for example the head of the Statue of Liberty sequence is terrific. The editing too is nicely handled, especially in the cuts between parts of the tape we're watching from Rob and Beth's day out at Coney Island back to the events of the night.

Whilst 90% of this film is good or better, the remaining 10% is so abysmal that it destroys a lot of the good work. That 10% is largely the writing of the dialogue. It may be just one part of a screenplay, but if it doesn't work it sticks out like a 90-foot monster and it really doesn't work here. Most of the ridiculous lines are handed to Hud and it doesn't help that he's the weakest actor in the film. I enter the following into evidence...


Hud: What time is the last chopper?
Rob: 0600 hours
Hud: What time is that?
Rob: 6 o-clock
Hud: Oh yeah, I knew that.


Hud: Thanks for saving me. Otherwise I'd be, like, dead.


(3am, our 'heroes' trapped in the subway, war rages on street level)
Rob: Wait a minute, this track carries the 6 [train].
Hud: Uh, Rob, I don't think the trains are running.


(Rob realises his battery is dead. He's desperately trying to retrieve his voicemail. He runs towards an electronics store that's being looted, quite obviously to get a battery)
Hud: Uh Rob, I think the store is closed man.


(A 90-foot monster rages along the streets of Manhattan ripping up buildings.)
Hud: Rob, something strange is happening outside.


He gets my vote for the "you ruined the movie" which they should consider creating as a new category at the Oscars just to spice things up. A shame really as there is some very good work and a lot of effort gone in to making this film. It just didn't quite do it for me.

C+

January Preview

With my main 2008 preview to come, here's a little preview of some potential highlights (and lowlights?) in January...

First up, I've gone for the new one from the Coen Brothers' 'No Country For Old Men', featuring a rumoured-to-be-stunning performance from a Matt all-time top 25 performer, Javier Bardem. Also starring Tommy Lee Jones and Josh Brolin, the story focuses on Llewelyn Moss (Brolin) who finds a stash of money and heroin and the bloody events that follow. Bardem seems to have been given huge creative licence and, possibly, the role of a lifetime in the form of a sadistic killer who flips coins for human lives. This could be stunning. Released Friday 18/01/07

Next up comes the Tom Hanks vehicle, Charlie Wilson's War. Hanks plays the titular character who helps to arm Afghan rebels against the Russians, at the heart of the cold-war era, with obvious and deep consequences. This sounds weighty and I'm sure it will be, although I hear that early reviews (unlike No Country For Old Men) have not been favourable, despite it once being an early frontrunner in the Oscar race. Still, an all-star cast of Hanks, the returning Julia Roberts, Amy Adams and the always excellent Philip Seymour Hoffman promises much, not least in dollars, as my colleague's excellent post a month or so back highlighted. Should be worth a watch at least. Released this Friday (11/01/08).

A lowlight for me, but surely a highlight for others, is Tim Burton's Sweeney Todd. I was distinctly unimpressed with the initial trailer and now that I've found out it's a musical, am less impressed still. However, Burton, and his long-time collaborator, the ludicrously handsome Johnny Depp, have massive followings and this is sure to have a wide appeal, even if it is not one I'll be queuing up for. Or even dusting off the Blockbuster shelves in three years for that matter. Still, for those who are going to check it out, expect a colourful interpretation, a solid performance from Depp and plenty of (not Al) gore. I hope you enjoy! Also starring the excellent, and always always watchable, Alan Rickman. And Ali G and Borat creator Sacha Baron Cohen. Released 25/01/08.

On MyFilmVault we always like the personal touch, none of this withdrawn ivory-tower film journalism nonsense on here, so here are two films I'll certainly be checking out in January after belated arrivals to a screen near me in Leicester. The first is Ang Lee's new espionage thriller Lust, Caution, starring one of my favorite actors of all time, Tony Leung. I cannot wait. I can wait even less for a film that I've been salivating over for at least a year, the impressive-looking The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. It seems I'm destined not to see this film, so the projector will probably break or the cinema burn down or my bike will get a flat on the way, or something, so keep your fingers crossed for me. I hope I finally make it! Will post reviews if I do manage to see them both.

And finally...January sees the reissue of a Hitchcock classic and a film Adam and I both adore, The Lady Vanishes (1938), starring Margaret Lockwood, May Whitty and Michael Redgrave. Despite its age, this remains a true edge-of-your-seat thriller about a woman who mysteriously disappears on a train journey, that stands comparison with anything the directors of today can offer. In fact, it surpasses them. Who touches the master after all? If you've not seen it, you've got to check this out, I can promise you that you won't regret it! In fact, even if you have seen it, what an excuse to catch it again with Hitchcock on the big screen!

And that takes us up to 01/02/2008 and the release of my first 'can't wait to see' film of 2008 - Cloverfield, the stunning trailer for which I've pasted below...



HAPPY NEW YEAR MYFILMVAULT READERS!!! Let's hope 2008 is a great year for moviegoing!