10 Cloverfield Lane (2016) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
677 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
...oh dear Abrams. Again.
sonofocelot-110 May 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I'll leave this review fairly concise.

This film was originally called "the cellar" the premise being what we see for the first 90% of "10 cloverfield lane": an excellent, brilliantly-scripted thriller set in an underground bunker, the tension lying in the "goodie-or-baddie" mystery that is the owner of the bunker, Howard. He is telling our hero, Michelle, that she cannot leave because the air outside is not breathable due to an attack, probably nuclear. She wants to leave because she suspects that Howard is insane.

That premise right there is perfect. Is Howard telling the truth? Is he a deranged kidnapper? Will Michelle eventually decide to leave? Is the air really breathable outside? The magnitude of that intrigue would have made for a brilliant film.

Would have.

This is when JJ Abrams and bad robot came in and basically did what they do with the end of every single project they ever take on. Ruin it. Ruin it absolutely horrifically. They have clearly seen monetary value in the name "cloverfield" and are insisting on making it a franchise. Do we expect monsters going into this film? Yes. Do we get them? Yes. Was it necessary? Absolutely one million percent no.

10 minutes from the end of what had been a gripping film, we finally see Michelle leave, and escape the bunker. She realises that the air is still breathable. Now, "pre-abrams" as I'll refer to it, this would've been an excellent ending. A bittersweet tale of abuse, of loneliness from Howard's point of view, of revenge, of victory. But with a huge psychological trauma to go home with. Honestly this film would be perfect had it ended here. But it wasn't to be.

This is when the aliens come. We seem to in the blink of an eye turn from "the cellar", a brilliantly told thriller, into an Abrams, overly-Hollywood, big budget cringefest. For me, it wasn't the moment the spaceship came on the screen, it was the moment our timid hero, portrayed brilliantly up until now, who'd just been crying uncontrollably with relief at the air still being breathable, suddenly turns stern action hero. She looks up and says "you have GOT to be kidding me", in the same emphatic way we've seen in 600 "five out of ten" films down the years.

I'm sorry, but you've just seen alien life. And that's your reaction? In what until now was a very realistic, well told suspense thriller? Not having it for a second. It was like we could see the moment Abrams took over. And it ruined what could have been a classic.

The remaining 9 minutes are nothing more than a glorified creature feature, culminating in our hero, who's suddenly lost all her emotions, driving off to help the "human resistance" fight against the aliens.

End of movie. What amazes me most is the number of critic reviews I've seen saying "the aliens are a metaphor for what is outside a person's lonely bubble of abuse" or some nonsense along those lines. Sorry guys but you're thinking WAY too much into it. This is a story of a money-grabbing company, who bought a perfectly good script, and ruined the ending with aliens.

I'm not entirely sure what I expected in all honesty. It's Abrams. I saw the ending to LOST and vowed never to make the mistake of investing my time in any of his projects again. Sure enough, I made the aforementioned mistake again and it's almost as bad as LOST was (minus the 5 years of my life id invested for the lovey-dovey, semi-religious, out-of- ideas cop out snoozefest that was the ending to LOST).

Abrams strikes me as one of those who inexplicably takes pride in disappointing his audiences, as if he feels he's somehow above them and that the negative reviews are just people who don't "get" him. I think in all honesty it's more a sign that he's just not very good at what he does.

My advice? Turn off when you see Michelle remove her oxygen mask. Pretend that's the end and you have your film of the year. Watch on for yet another example of "how to ruin a perfectly decent project: by JJ Abrams"

5/10. 10 for the first hour and a half, minus 5 for the last 10 minutes.
261 out of 340 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Unfortunately the ending ruined an otherwise great film.
Imme-van-Gorp30 January 2019
This movie is full of suspense. It makes you guess about what is real and what is not. It happens more than once that you have to wonder about what is the truth and who is lying.

Because you are just as clueless as the main character, Michelle, you really get to experience the same type of emotions and confusion as she is. This not only makes you feel closer to Michelle as a character, but also to the overall story.

They did, however, ruin this connection that they build over the course of the story by making this sloppy, rushed and just strange ending. If they had made a different ending, my rating could have been an 8 or maybe even a 9. Depends on how good of an ending it would have been.

7/10. -Imme van Gorp
24 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Slow building & plot alternating claustrophobic bunker movie with a sloppy ending
DVR_Brale27 July 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I've always loved movies with strong atmosphere. Three people locked together in an underground shelter is a recipe for making a movie which is going to draw you in a rather small but peculiar world.

This is one if the rare non-crime movies that keep you guessing what might have happened and what's happening. No where does the plot release it's vents but on contrary it keeps building pressure.

There are little if any horror elements in this movie. Those of you who want to get scared are not going to be content. Those of you looking for a tense, slow building atmosphere are going to love this one! This is primarily a mystery movie.

John Goodman has done such a good job that he even succeeded in making me nervous like I was locked with him. There's nothing really strange about Howard. The conditions are guilty for making him looking wicked. Or are they?

While the main premise has been greatly utilized I don't think ending was sound or in some way contributory to a plot. It's as if writers didn't know how to leave some space open for a sequel.

You can enjoy this movie equally well watching it by yourself or with somebody else. Go and see it.
30 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Fantastic, gripping, thoroughly enjoyable, until the final part ruins it...
mhodaee4 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I give the 5/10 out of the credit I owe to the original writers of the fascinating psychological horror that takes place inside the bunker. The mystery is compelling: Is Howard telling the truth? Is there any real threat outside? Is Howard a crazy child-abusing maniac? Did he plan all this to own Michelle? etc. I could all go on pretty well had the film ended with the heroine's escape, but then, all of a sudden, what the? REAL ALIENS? Are you kidding me? Just how "lost" are you Mr. Abrams?! You turned the fantastic, gripping thriller about a deranged paranoid old man into a totally irrelevant tale of worm aliens taking over the earth? The ending ruins everything. The character of Michelle was well portrayed as a woman running away from problems instead of facing them, finally managing to "grow up" and learn to fight her problems. The ending, however, turns her into a completely different person. From a timid girlfriend, Michelle turns into an alien- smacking badass chick straight out of a classic sci-fi alien flick who blows up a giant alien invader with a bottle of liquor and a matchbox and, not frightened in the least, decides to take the fight to the aliens herself. The movie begins and proceeds as a psychological thriller/drama about paranoia, claustrophobia, and insanity and in a split second turns into the worst moments of the Resident Evil franchise. I literally thought I was watching a remake of the ending of The Thing, with the same actress and all. Great job uncle J.J., you did it again. Had I know he was involved in the plot, I would've thought twice before watching this film. You CAN enjoy this film, just turn if off as soon as the hero goes free. keep watching and it'll turn all the fun you had into utter disappointment, frustration, and resentment.
63 out of 85 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Powerful and shocking mystery
jesussanchezfdez11 March 2016
10 Cloverfield Lane gives all the development and the meaningful story that its blood relative installment lacked completely. This is not a spectacle full of screams and special effects. This is a spectacle of tension and suspense of epic proportions. This is a really feel-bad movie at certain points.

First of all, you have to take the leap of faith and go ahead watching without knowing anything of the plot. Don't worry because all the teasers doesn't reveal anything important, but don't try to search information. If everything were that easy, even Hitchcock or Nolan movies would lose all interest.

I was extremely hooked since the furious start to the eye popping and surprising finale. The direction is amazing and claustrophobic. The performances are great, looking up to a surprising Winstead and a unrestrained unforgettable turn by Goodman. The story is gleefully unapologetic delivering chills and full blooded twists (the biggest of all is the intense ending reveal) even thought it deviates from the monster POV storyline.

Secretly made, impeccably marketed, nicely developed and finally here along with us: 10 Cloverfield Lane promised thrills and delivered it and then some. I was expecting some things that I tasted but I was surprised by a complexity and a twisted sense of horror that I didn't see coming. 2016 has released the very first great movie of the year.
223 out of 341 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
10 Cloverfield Lane
brands429 March 2016
Two months ago, no one knew that 10 Cloverfield existed, let alone was about to be wide released in theaters. One month ago, no one had any idea how, if at all, this film was related to the 2008 film Cloverfield except for the obvious title and produced J.J. Abrams. And now, all is revealed. Sort of. Here's my review.

One of the greatest things 10 Cloverfield Lane has to offer is that the audience really has no idea what to expect going into the film. Very much in the J.J Abrams way, the production for this film has been left completely under-wraps and the trailers have revealed next to nothing. That's one of the benefits for the movies, so I'm not going to spoil or give anything away in my synopsis or the review. I won't even tell you if this movie is indeed a Cloverfield sequel or if it's something different altogether. You'll have to find out for yourself, because I can tell you right now that you should spend the money to go see it in theaters.

I'll be brief. A woman we know very little about named Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) is involved in a car crash in a breath taking opening credit sequence. She wakes up a few days later to find herself in an underground bunker with Howard (John Goodman), a large and crazed eyed farmer standing above her. He tells her that she can't leave, because some sort of disaster has happened and it's not safe to go outside. Finding herself alone with Howard and another man named Emmett (John Gallagher Jr.), and I'm stealing their tag line here because it's a dang good tag line, they find out that Monsters come in many forms.

Obviously I had no idea to expect when I went into 10 Cloverfield Lane. No one did. But within the first five minutes they set the tone so you know what kind of movie they are going for, and I found myself instantly engaged. For the rest of the film, I was floored with what was going on. Director Dan Trachtenberg takes the reigns on creating a film that will hit you with the unexpected, and leave your jaw hanging.

The best word I could think of to describe this film while I was watching it was claustrophobic. For the scenes that takes place in the bunker (I'm not saying how much of the screen time that actually is) they create such an intense and nervous atmosphere that you feel yourself getting antsy along with the characters.

That's because for almost the whole film, we don't really know what's going on. We know what John Goodman is telling us and leading us to believe, but we have no idea if that's reliable or not. We discover things along with the characters, which is why this film is such a good build up. When the conclusion to the film finally comes, you leave more than satisfied. But don't ruin it for yourself by looking up online spoilers to see if it is a Cloverfield sequel. Spend the money. See the movie. Find out for yourself. It's worth it.

I've heard the argument and I've sited it a few times in past reviews, that the best way to bring out great performances in actors is to lock them in a single setting film where they having nothing to hide their performance behind. That's what happens here. Mary Elizabeth Winstead, an actress who deserves to get more work than she does, played the character so well as she captures the nervous ticks without acting completely helpless the whole time. In the end, she was pretty bad-ass. John Gallagher Jr., a character who could have been super annoying, ended up being great in the film too, and had really good chemistry with Mary Elizabeth Winstead.

But the stand-out of the film if John Goodman. John Goodman is in so many films every year that we sometimes take him for granted and forget how good of an actor he can be when he's not mailing it in (whatever Hangover film he was in. I forget) but rather commits whole heartedly to a role. That's what happens here. He could have easily over-cooked his performance where it came of as cartoon-y or unrealistic, but he hit just the right level of disturbing and off-putting where you are crept out by the guy but you can't be sure if he's in the right or wrong. It's a performance similar to Joel Edgerton's in The Gift.

ALSO just read on IMDb that Bradely Cooper's voice appeared over a cell-phone in one scene. I knew I had heard the voice somewhere but I couldn't put my finger on it until now.

At no point of 10 Cloverfield Lane does the film slow down or lose interest. It uses it's hour and forty five minute runtime, a surprisingly long one for this type of film, to achieve the best possible effects. The film flies by and I found myself never wanting it to be over.

10 Cloverfield Lane is a movie you should rush out to the theater to go see. Accept that you know nothing about it going in, and enjoy that experience. Because it's something that doesn't happen often and it's a rare gift when it does. 10 Cloverfield Lane has a lot to offer despite the fact that it's a very small film. In fact, regardless of the fact if they are in the same universe, I'll say I enjoyed 10 Cloverfield Lane more than I enjoyed Cloverfield itself. And I want to see the story continued in a sequel. 10 Cloverfield Lane gets an A-, it's one of my favorite films of 2016 so far. Go see it this weekend. " - brands42
256 out of 400 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Hmmm...
fil-nik095 October 2016
Warning: Spoilers
First of all, I must say that I was expecting 'something different' considering the 7.3 note here! Something really worth of that note, but this is not that great!

As many have pointed out, this film has a problem with ending. I would have ended the film when she sees the birds flying. But that alien / mars attacks ending was just totally out of the blue. Totally not connecting with the film ( though I admit it proves the story that something bad had happened). I mean... even if they really wanted the alien ending, it could have been more subtle. This was like you added a totally different movie to the one you are doing.

Good point is that you really DO NOT know if the guy who held the girl in the basement is good or bad. We do not know if he killed anyone before he took the life of the guy in the basement. Everything is up to you to decide. All in all, he is actually a good guy from what we were seeing up to the point when he shot the guy ( but only when he said he would take his gun).

All in all, this maybe could have a better note if it wasn't for such laughable ending. I did not like it.

5 from me.
46 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Annoyed by people who expect alien holocaust in this movie
sipanu_alin16 June 2016
Warning: Spoilers
First of all, the film was more than good, in my opinion and, for the people who like to see a good or more than good movie, I recommend buying a ticket or the DVD release or just rent it. As a medium spoiler, I'd say that, plot wise, it reminded me of "Law abiding citizen", with the first three quarters of the movie full of suspense and plot twists, and the last act, a little rushed and over the top. And that justifies the two penalty points I gave to this movie, one of them just for the exaggerated use of a bottle of good brandy.

As for "10 Cloverfield Lane", I can say it offered just the things you would expect... from a movie you really don't know what to expect. A thin trailer, with little to no information about the plot was, in my opinion, was a clever move and made me watch it. And, to be honest, except for the final act, I was more than satisfied with the emotion, the tension, the acting (great for two of the main characters, kinda OK for the other one), the way the director played with my mind and feelings about the characters and the way it builds them. You expect them to be capable of doing the things they do in the movie. For once, a complete looser at the beginning of the movie doesn't become, inexplicably and over night, some kind of Macgyver/guerrilla fighter at the end. It's a movie you can't forget really easy.

Now, for the part that I'm quite annoyed with: the alien mayhem expectations that make this movie "baaad"...

I've seen a lot of reviews and opinions about how bad this movie is, about how much of a mixed up plot nonsense is and about the fact that most of them where "waiting for something to happen". Well, as I mentioned before, a lot of things happen, just not the ones you would expect. And, as I've seen, the upset and disappointed moviegoers were, mostly, the ones that expected to see a sequel for Cloverfield. Well (spoiler alert) IT'S NOT! It's a movie that tells a story happening during the events of Cloverfield and that is the only connection to the original. It can be taken as a standalone film, for that matter. And, as I said, a quite good one.

In conclusion: if you expect monster aliens fighting military helis, explosions, guns and all that Michael Bay stuff, then skip this one. On the other hand, if you expect a good thriller (with some added Sci- Fi at the end), good acting and disturbing plot twists, then it's the kind of movie for you.

P.S.: I'm not saying anything about the plot, because, just as one reviewer said, "the more you know about the movie, the less interesting it will be".
24 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Great claustrophobic story with fine performances... and a twist
NonSequiturL9 March 2016
Full disclosure: The year is 2007. A trailer hits cinema screens advertising a mysterious film named "Cloverfield." Nobody knows what it's about, except that it's riding on the wave of the found footage genre, and that it seems to depict a giant monster attack on New York. Speculation immediately breaks out all over the internet, but nowhere more fiercely than on the IMDb forums, with many folks being caught up in the genius viral marketing. I myself was one of those people, along with my wife. Yes, we met on IMDb's Cloverfield forum. She moved from the US to Australia a few years after, we got married, and we've lived together happily ever since.

Yes, that is the power of film; it can bring people together in the most unlikely ways possible.

So, it's with some excitement that we were blindsided by the brief and vague advertising campaign for 10 Cloverfield Lane. Does it have any connections to the original Cloverfield? What's JJ Abrams playing at here, exactly? Without giving too much away, it's not a direct sequel, but rather a sequel in tone. I'm assuming Abrams is going for an anthology style series here, with each entry being a different story tied together by their themes and science-fiction setting. It's clearly a marketing thing, but if that means we'll get more films like this, I'm certainly okay with it.

10 Cloverfield Lane eschews its predecessor's found-footage trappings, and immerses us in a classic style bottle thriller. The setting is limited and claustrophobic, and the cast small, but the story and tension will grab you and not let up until the end. The nature of the mystery means your opinion will hang very precariously on whether you like that ending, and I suspect it will be divisive. There's not a great deal of resolution, and if I'm correct in assuming this will be an anthology series from now on, I doubt we'll ever get any. But that's fine, because I don't think the story that would follow the film really needs to be told.

What matters are the performances. John Goodman is the real draw card here. He gives a stunning turn that is delightful, sympathetic and absolutely terrifying in equal doses. He's had so many great roles in the past, but he is unforgettable here. Mary Elizabeth Winstead is also very likable as the resourceful protagonist. Perhaps a little too resourceful at times, but for the most part we're with her happily throughout.

The film looks fantastic despite the cramped environs, with great use of color and shadow and some interesting cinematography. There are some nice designs and special effects toward the end of the film, even if they may be considered a little derivative. The score is tense and effective, and keeps you on the edge of your seat.

The script is great with very little flab, and if you like these kinds of stories which lock characters together in tight, paranoid spaces then you'll find a lot to enjoy here. Just don't go in expecting Cloverfield 2, because this is not it. It's its own beast, and has a brave ending that you'll either love or hate.
155 out of 242 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
The secrecy made everything better! (NO SPOILERS)
Matt-Canalcon15 March 2016
First of all, if you want to watch '10 Cloverfield Lane', make sure to avoid any kind of spoilers on the internet. I will try to write this review without spoilers, even if it's a bit difficult considering the movie I just witnessed.

'10 Cloverfield Lane' is an amazing mystery/suspense movie that serves as a sequel to the 2008 hit 'Cloverfield'. I have to say, it's hard to tell if the greatness of this movie is going to hold up in 10 years because of how everything surrounding the movie made it better, but I really really liked it.

Me and my friend tried to avoid the spoilers on the internet and read as less as possible on the movie before we went to see it. Fortunately, the brilliant marketing campaign did not reveal anything about the story, and the fact that it was a sequel to 'Cloverfield' is going to make you constantly guess. Is it a traditional horror/suspense movie? Is it a monster movie? Where are the monsters? WHAT IS GOING? (Pretty much what I kept asking myself all along the movie)

John Goodman was incredible, definitely the standout of this movie. The soundtrack was great, some jukebox oldies and a thrilling score.

The movie starts with Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) driving off from her marriage and taking the road to leave her husband. This is made with a perfect montage, and there's no dialogue for the first 4-5 minutes of the movie. Then, things take a turn and we are transported to the bunker you saw in the trailers.

I will say it again, go watch this film, and don't read anything about it on the internet. I can't recall the last time a movie kept me guessing like this one. If you tend to get bored and tired by the usual clichés in movies, buy your ticket to '10 Cloverfield Lane' and enjoy your time at the movies.

Clever marketing, brilliant story, very good direction, great performance by the cast, it's hard to complain about this film!

9/10
121 out of 198 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Much better than the 2008 "Cloverfield" movie, this is about a gripping & intense story and raw tension rather than special effects and crushing things.
jigsaw-9110 March 2016
If this is going to be an anthology or if this is going to be followed by that rumored third installment that has been recently spoiled by J.J. Abrahms, I can say that nobody doubts about the secretly marketed "10 Cloverfield Lane" is a great movie on its own. And a movie that if it were spoiled by someone here or at any review would be cruel.

Since the start it reveals to be a movie that doesn't hide an ace, but a hundred.

The pace can be a little slow at the first half only to add more and more tension, hooking the audience and introducing them into the movie like they were one of the people inside that bunker.

John Goodman will be a real trend the future days thanking its superb performance. He's so twisty, complex developed character. He and Mary Elisabeth Winstead make the movie shine alongside the story.

The story is so little, then so game-changer, with twists and turns that are smart rather than empty. It's one of that makes you guess all the time.

The ending is more of a bang than a whimper. Even when it succumbs to the action and polemic moves, it will leave you on a grim and high note, pestering for another outing if it's any good like this.

If the "Cloverfield" that started it all was about speaking without breath and CGI scares, this "10 Cloverfield Lane" is about deeper intentions, deeper tension and personal stuff that is scarier than a giant monster. While the connection to that movie is not so remarkable until the finale, this installment is so brilliant on its own, so well marketed (without ruining any twist) and so well ended that will surely please any viewer who were looking for a damn good movie. This is a scary movie like the classic ones. Don't miss it.
203 out of 345 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
An incredible ride from beginning to end.
benrobtaylor12 March 2016
To describe 10 Cloverfield Lane in one word: Genreless.

I won't say much about the film as I'm a strong believer of going in blind, but I will say that the performances, writing, and cinematic pacing worked perfectly together to create a truly unique film.

I loved watching it, and the moments of comedy sprouting up throughout made the duality between light-hearted humanity and dark confusion work perfectly together. I would give the Titles and Credits 10/10 as well, because they were just so damn fantastic and fresh and reminded me that titling is an art form like any other in the cinematic Genre. If you enjoy good film, you will enjoy 10 Cloverfield Lane.
116 out of 193 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Perfect reminder
rachaelblakeegypt11 March 2016
It isn't very often that you can go see a movie at the theater and not have the slightest idea of where it'll take you. Even more rare is when a movie like that delivers a wholly original story that's even more satisfying than you ever thought it would be.

'10 Clover-field Lane' is a perfect reminder that films can still surprise us, delight us, and horrify us in a way that's never been done before. Mark my words, Dan Trachtenberg will be a force to be reckoned with in the future. His feature length directorial debut is a showcase for his absolute confidence and strength as a storyteller and filmmaker, and I can't wait to see what he does next.

Of course, it always helps to have the likes of J. J. Abrams and Bad Robot standing behind you, and their experience and talent absolutely boosts this film into the stratosphere.

As far as acting is concerned, Mary Elizabeth Winstead gives her best performance yet, and shows us a strong lead character who's completely believable in a situation that plays out like a horrible nightmare. Speaking of bad dreams, John Goodman turns in a performance unlike anything he's ever done before, and manages to be both strangely sweet and unbearably creepy. And John Gallagher, Jr. nails his roll perfectly and adds some much needed levity to a story that's almost overwhelmingly claustrophobic.

I've been thinking about what film I could use to compare '10 Clover-field Lane' to, and while I think even a comparison to a specific film might give too much away, I feel safe in saying that it is absolutely Hitchcock. It's a brilliant, brilliant movie that's told in the best possible way: by showing, not telling.

Go and see it as soon as you can.
156 out of 271 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A wild roller-coaster ride.
sunznc13 March 2016
I love the film and am trying to figure out how to write a review without giving anything away.

A woman on the road at night is suddenly in an accident. When she wakes up you immediately start wondering what direction this film could go in. It could go down several different paths. You think you've got it all figured out. Based upon what you are seeing, there really is no other way to go. Wrong.

At some point things seem to settle into some harmonious normalcy but then things get ugly and disturbing. Always were a bit disturbing but more ominous.

The acting is excellent by everyone, the twists and turns very good especially since these three characters are in an underground bunker. It is edge of your seat, leaning forward intensity. A wild ride for sure. Check it out!
90 out of 153 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Just don't.....
s-thepatel6 May 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I never write reviews. ever. This is probably my first EVER.

This movie was so bad that I had to write this review and even if one person doesn't watch it because of my review, I will feel accomplished.

98-99% of the movie is in a bunker with two guys and a girl. I'm waiting and waiting and waiting for something to happen and finally last few minutes of the movie. The girl finally escapes the bunker (she was originally forced into it) just to find out most of the Earth is taken over by aliens and the best part, she was able to destroy one alien ship with a bottle of liquor. For a girl who runs away from one sign of problems, she did pretty good with an alien chasing her and a ship carrying her in a car in the air. Like what?

I can't anymore. I just can't.

Why can't I vote 0 stars?
166 out of 308 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Taking A Stroll Down Cloverfield Lane
strong-122-4788857 October 2016
(Fave movie-quote) - "You don't know what's out there!"

Welcome To 10 Cloverfield Lane.... Now, I wouldn't ever say that I loved this Sci-Fi/Thriller - But, I would like to say that this was certainly one of those rare films from that genre where (for a change) it appeared that some real thought had actually gone into its story-line.

Yeah. And, when it came down to playing the "is-it-or-isn't-it-a-hoax?" game with the audience - I thought that 10 Cloverfield Lane certainly did deliver a satisfying 110 minutes of entertaining diversion.

Yes. There definitely were some very disappointing and demented moments in this taut tale of apparent global Armageddon - But as the mounting suspense soon took a firm hold in the action - I chose to forgive this film for all of its unavoidable inadequacies.

My one big complaint here comes down to the miscasting of John Goodman as the "Thomas" character. To me, Goodman was just too much of a tired, old, bloated couch-potato to be at all believable in his part.
18 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Derivative and plain boring.
CineCritic251716 March 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Goodman plays Howard, a paranoid psychopath and the proprietor of a large underground hideout, built for the occasion. In said hideout, he plays house to two co-dwellers: a bearded moron (John Gallagher Jr) and an attractive young lady played by Mary Elizabeth Winstead. Is there really a threat outside, will Howard behave himself? The problem is, after 20 minutes of tedious scenario and bland characters, who really cares?

The film never picks up any speed, sports no subplots, feels like it could go anywhere without sticking to any internal logic (which indeed it doesn't) and merely serves hollow and underused characters.

It's obvious the writers of this project wanted to fuse two genres of film but ended up having half the audience wet their pants over the ridiculous ending in which an alien spacecraft is destroyed by a bottle of Single Malt and the other half of the audience so abashed, they dare not admit they just wasted 2 hours of their lives.
142 out of 264 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Insanely Overrated
randy_orton_fan1 May 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Why is this movie so critically acclaimed?

It's your typical horror/thriller. Except this time they're stuck in a bunker with a nutcase who shoots a guy then gets blown up.

Aliens don't show up until the end and Mary Sue, that's what she is not her name, blows their ship up with a molotov cocktail.

Overrated trash, just like the original Cloverfield. People love it based on name and the insane amounts of viral adverting the series loves to exploit.

If this movie had been called anything else, it would not only been a flop, but the same people praising it would be the most critical.
84 out of 151 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
JJ Con Trick
doorsscorpywag18 March 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I loved Cloverfield which for me was one of the best films of the 21st Century. I saw it in a cinema and loved it and watched it a dozen times since on DVD and still love it.

Cue Super 8 which insinuated it had a Cloverfield connection but was just about a bad CGI alien spider that made a space ship out of a water tank. Not a bad movie but not great either.

Then out of the blue comes a trailer for 10 Cloverfield Lane which may or not be a Cloverfield sequel. The clever use of the word Cloverfield hints at a connection and then J.J. Abrams feeds that with his comments.

If like me you loved Cloverfield then try to be unlike me and don't waste 10 pound on this absolute crock of a movie. Massively disappointed and feel cheated after watching this garbage.

A girl wakes up after a crash in an underground shelter with a young bloke with a poorly arm and John Goodman. He tells her he 'rescued' her as there had been an attack and it's not safe above ground.

In the trailer we see

.....the girl fight her way up the stairs and peer out the doorway with a look of shock. Con trick as it's not what you (and I) probably thought.

.....Something huge seems to walk over the shelter causing stuff to fall on the floor. Again a completely unexplained scene that later makes absolutely no sense at all.

.....The famous drum scene as Goodman dons gloves and starts to open a 40 gallon steel drum. Could it be a Clovy parasite? Or something equally strange and interesting? No it's a nothing scene that reveals nothing we imagined it would be. It does have a bit of shock value and is a central plot device for the finale but still nothing of any great interest to Cloverfield fans.

......Then the outside scene with the explosion the gas mask and the light and roar approaching the barn. When that was revealed I thought WTF?

There we have it. Whilst there may have been some cursory nods to Cloverfield they flash by so quickly that they are not noticeable without freeze and rewind buttons which my cinema did not have. Simply clever marketing using the name Cloverfield prominently to attract attention to a pretty dull psycho film with some utter bilge to end it with. It says something when the film makers have to nick scenes from the incredibly awful WOTW by Stephen Spielberk.

The acting was very mediocre with John Goodman, who is a great actor, seemingly catching a nap as he delivered his lines. The sound was terrible and even in a cinema I could barely hear what was said. The CGI for the finale would make the Sci-Fi channel blush.

I left the theatre 10 pound lighter robbed of nearly 2 hours of valuable time and completely disillusioned with J.J. Abrams All that for this complete twaddle that Alan Smithee would disown.
81 out of 147 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Unbearable. The $20m budget was for paid reviews.
jamaicanprince8614 May 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Awful does not even begin to describe this mess of a movie. I am absolutely gobsmacked by all the positive reviews here and on rotten tomatoes.....Or maybe I live in an alternate universe? This is right up there with overrated movies like Gravity and Inception.

Anyone ever see South Park's ImaginationLand episode where they interview Hollywood directors for ideas on how to stop terrorist from taking over? They interview and dismiss one crap big time Hollywood director after another until they got to Mel Gibson-who actually had an idea that made sense...Then they conclude, "say what you want about Mel Gibson, but he knows story structure".

Whoever wrote and directed this pile of steaming garbage does not know story structure.

(Spoliers) Yea, the guy was crazy but that girl was so unlikable and unbelievable. Absolutely NOTHING happens until the last 5 mins where it suddenly switches gears and becomes a post apocolyptic sci=fi flick.
96 out of 179 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Part of this are a total 9, but it also drags at times, and is an awkward mash
secondtake11 November 2016
10 Cloverfield Lane (2016)

This is a tricky movie to review because it tries to do three different things, and it does two of them well. It's a movie that gets so much better as it goes, you hate the manipulative first twenty minutes more and more.

The problem is worse because I don't want to give away the plot. There are a few key twists that are part of what makes the movie special. The last section, which I can't outline a bit, is by far the best part, and it isn't given time to develop. Oddly, the last part is also preposterous, and the main character survives against all logic, and the first sections of the film strive for true fictional accuracy.

So, ultimately, the point of the film is to surprise and surprise. What really bothered me was the way the first section, where the leading woman is help captive (you learn this right away), tries to mislead us in a sensational way that doesn't make sense with the main central part of the film.

John Goodman, the big name here, plays a survivalist who is portrayed as a good guy with a mixed up sense of justice (and some personal loose screws). He's pretty good, though doesn't command the role quite the way he does some others in his career. The shelter he's created is elaborate, and the crisis outside the shelter is kept ambiguous— and doubtful—which is a great bit of suspense.

The final section almost seems to suggest a sequel—one that would be utterly different than this film. Watch for it (if it happens) because it should be fun.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A brilliant mystery that will keep you guessing until the end
jtindahouse9 March 2016
The first thing I'll say is that I'm not going to spoil a single thing about this film (other than how good it is), because everyone deserves the chance to see this film as I did - without a clue to the answer of the mystery and simply looking for any shred of evidence to guide my opinion. I actually had very little idea what kind of a film I was in for with '10 Cloverfield Lane'. I had seen 'Cloverfield' years back and mildly enjoyed it (according to the rating I gave it on IMDb) but could remember very little of it. I knew what the plot was about and that it was a "found footage" film but could remember almost zero specifics. I can tell you though that I won't be forgetting specifics about this sequel for a very long time.

I love nothing more than a well created mystery where the audience are left in the same confused state as the character/s and are filling in the pieces of the puzzle as the same pace that they are. This is one of those films. I see it was originally titled 'The Cellar' before it was reworked into a 'Cloverfield' sequel and I can very well imagine it working all on its own as a stand-alone thriller.

John Goodman is the star of the show. He truly can be a brilliant actor when he sets his mind to a character. He plays the role perfectly never giving away any more than he needs to and adds to the mystery surrounding everything perfectly. Mary Elizabeth Winstead also impressed me in the lead role. She's likable and bad ass depending on the scene and plays both equally well.

I can't say enough about how much I enjoyed this film. I think it helps when you go in with no real expectations (as I can imagine a lot of audience members doing for this type of film) and then just out of nowhere you find yourself enjoying the hell out of it. As previously stated I won't give anything away, which leaves my hands tied a touch in discussing one of the key aspects of the film. All that's really left to say in that case is see this film!
105 out of 204 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Interesting but padded
jadavix13 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
"10 Cloverfield Lane" is a superior example of the kind of story that would have made it into a half an hour on a show like "The Twilight Zone" or "The Outer Limits". For some reason most horror/sci-fi movies these days have that feeling, like what you're seeing would have been far more effective at a shorter run time, and the idea doesn't really sustain a feature length.

I guess kids today, who didn't grow up with shows like that, may not have the same impression.

The story is interesting enough, and is largely held together by the unsettling performance of John Goodman. The ending is also a show stopper, though the movie has some padding on the way there that may make your interest wane.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Really very enjoyable and tense...
wheeliebin6928 June 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I've only recently watched this on a plane from the States to the UK and I think one of the reasons I'm writing this is how surprised I am to see 1 or 2 rated reviews here.

The set-up is cute - essentially making you guess (and second guess) what genre of film you're watching and the three leads are so good. John Goodman has the eye-catching 'is he or isn't he a loon' part but that only works as well as it does because of the other two.

So it's the ambiguity that makes the whole thing work (other reviews have criticised the static nature of things and 'boooring') but that's what makes it tense. It's set in a bunker - not a lot of room for running around. Plus, you don't quite know who to root for or who may have a yet to be revealed agenda. Well handled, simple and believable in a weird scenario.

The ending (last 20 minutes or so) felt a wee bit daft like it was an idea bolted on to a different screenplay. Having said that, this was 'softened' somewhat by adopting a tone of voice adopted from Carpenter's The Thing ("you gotta be f*****g kidding me...").

Sorry - genuinely surprised by the haters. Low key, tight, claustrophobic and tense. The ending could disappoint but shouldn't detract from what went before.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This movie is complete garbage
focalpointrd25 March 2016
Warning: Spoilers
May contain spoilers so read at your own risk.

Pretty much the WORST potential sequel to an unpredictable monster/destruction/action movie ever. Firstly, this lacks nearly all of those characteristics. Second, when did we find out that this was an alien attack in the first movie? It's almost expected of us to know this as we're waist deep into the second movie before we even discuss what could be outside the bunker. Oh, yeah... right... the bunker, the one we're forced to see from nearly every angle possible because 95% of the movie takes place in it. I feel like I know more about the bunker than I do about the surrounding area, location, and what is happening outside. Completely horrible. I expected MAYBE half of the movie to take place in the bunker, but no... 1hr 20mins into a 90~ min movie, and we're still in there, without having seen one monster aside from John Goodman's angrier side when he realizes Winstead's not going to play the role of his lover/daughter, or whatever. This is literally a movie about a crazed man who has the perfect excuse to kidnap this girl who he "bumps" into on the road during the unfolding events of what I assume is the first movie, but we'd never know because we're never told that! Do yourself a favor, and wait for this to hit red box for a dollar rental... or just skip it entirely and watch re-runs of Real World/Road Rules challenge. The scripted drama is far better in those shows than in this. Winstead should have done another Scott Pilgrim film instead of doing this, and the budget they probably spent on making this movie was likely minimal.
86 out of 169 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed