It’s certainly understandable why anyone would be skeptical
of 10 Cloverfield Lane. With an ad campaign that is purposely vague
about the film’s premise and a title that calls back to a disappointing monster
flick that used similar marketing tactics, one could be forgiven for outright
dismissing this one as a film studio's cynical attempt to use that same trick twice. The two films don't even seem related by subject matter or characters. However, this is one of those rare instances
where the complete opaqueness of the trailer is entirely justified, because as
a thriller 10 Cloverfield Lane doesn’t
just deliver, it delivers excellence.
After a car crash knocks her off the road, Michelle (Mary
Elizabeth Winstead) wakes up in a stonewalled, windowless room, chained to the
wall on a thin mattress. Her host is the imposing figure of Howard (John Goodman), a seemingly
emotionally unstable man who built this bomb shelter in case of foreign or
extraterrestrial attack. This is exactly
what he claims has happened, and he sees himself as Michelle’s savior from the radioactive air outside. Along with Emmet (John Gallagher),
a fellow survivor who pushed his way into Howard’s bunker, Michelle must try to
discover whether the world outside truly has succumbed to apocalyptic
circumstances or if Howard is just using that as an excuse to keep her against
her will.
The majority of the film takes place in the confined
quarters of the bunker, so it is largely dependent on character drama to drive
forward the plot, and that is the film’s greatest strength. Winstead displays a tough, yet vulnerable, determinism against
a desperate situation and Gallagher does a great job of playing her more
optimistic and naïve foil. The most
credit must go to John Goodman, though, who uses his massive figure to exude a
quiet menace. You easily get the
impression that even if the world has gone to shit, Howard is severely unhinged
and likely was long before the bombs dropped, which makes him a dangerous
roommate on the best of days.
Considering Goodman’s proclivity for supporting character roles, it can
be easy to forget just how good of an actor he is, as he dominates the stage
with hat-drop emotional turns and subtle physical quirks that tell us much more
about Howard than the dialogue ever could, all without slipping into scenery-chewing self-parody.
Equal kudos must be given to first-time feature director Dan
Trachtenberg, who has an incredible talent for tension and suspense. He knows just when to draw out a scene to
make the inevitable shock us, to twist the seemingly inevitable into new
surprises, and to just surprise us entirely with new possibilities. The claustrophobic atmosphere is used to
great effect, with distorted close-ups and a frantic score to keep you constantly
tense and unprepared for the next heart-dropping beat. Surprisingly, the film even manages to work
in a few laughs, though less because there are any funny jokes and more because
Trachtenberg clearly knows how to milk an awkward moment where nervous laughter
seems like the only appropriate response. This is a directorial talent to look out for, because this debut is stellar.
The one thing about this film that I can easily see become
an object of contention is the third act.
I won’t spoil it, but the tension is going to come between those who
came to see a Cloverfield movie and
those who came to see the film despite the Cloverfield
moniker. Personally, I think the ending
works, mainly as a thematic escalation of the gradually more insane twists the
film keeps throwing at us right up until the very end, but your mileage may
vary and I understand why. Truth be told, I didn’t
expect to walk out of 10 Cloverfield Lane
loving it, but that’s exactly what happened.
Forget the stupid marketing; this is a worthy addition to the horror
renaissance of recent years, and its found footage predecessor cannot tarnish
that.
No comments:
Post a Comment