Comments on: CLOVERFIELD and its spectacular Monster

By: » Sense of Wonder: “The Happening” Horrifies Wing-Nut

» Sense of Wonder: “The Happening” Horrifies Wing-Nut — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 23:09:58 +0000

[...] warming, which is essentially irrational. I learned this lesson when Lawrence French briefly offered global warming as a possible subtext for CLOVERFIELD, prompting a small outcry from the wingers. Their objections seldom if ever addressed the science, [...]

By: » DVD Review: The Mist: Two-Disc Collector’s Edition

» DVD Review: The Mist: Two-Disc Collector’s Edition — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:03:32 +0000

[...] It’s the tone of the times, a post 9/11 sensibility that underlies not only THE MIST but also CLOVERFIELD and Romero’s DIARY (and LAND) OF THE DEAD, much like the films of the 50’s reflected fear of [...]

By: ILoz Zoc

ILoz Zoc — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 01:41:11 +0000

I’m not sure on the political aspect yet. The image of the SOL head flying down the street is powerful and conveys urgency, things out of control, and whatever it was, damn it’s big. So it works well in the context of the film without reading deeper into it. I agree, though, that it could be interpreted as a political statement without reaching. It’s not like horror films shy away from that sort of thing: they tend to be perfect for it for the reason you noted. On another note, the viral/disease carried by the little fellows reminded me of the germ the Beast from 20,000 Fathoms’ blood carried. Nice to see some nods to “classic” horror.

By: » Cinefantasitque Web Surfing 01/24/08

» Cinefantasitque Web Surfing 01/24/08 — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 23:53:47 +0000

[...] the Statue of Liberty in ruins – a continually recurring visual motif, most recently seen in CLOVERFIELD. PLANET OF THE APES, A.I., and ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK also utilized the [...]

By: Steve Biodrowski

Steve Biodrowski — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 00:10:37 +0000

A few points:

1. This "review" is actually part of a regular column. Part of the purpose of a column is to give a writer latitude to get into personal opinions, including political opinions.

2. bandicoot calls the analysis "sophomoric" and says that Lawrence French did not see a metaphor in the movie, but bandicott never makes an argument to support his point; he simply "feel[s]" it.

3. The reference to the title Laura Ingraham's book is particularly inappropriate in this context. Ingraham was addressing herself not to reviewers but to artists. She herself tends to detect liberal messages in movies, but I doubt you will find bandicott writing to her and saying, "you don’t really see a strong metaphor ... here, you just decided to twist things around so you could get in a poke here and there." Why not? Because Ingraham disapproves of the liberal messages she finds.