In July, when the first trailer was screened in front of “Transformers,” curiosity arose about the latest project connected to J.J. Abrams (“Lost” and “Alias”).

Months ago, with no title or listing of actors, but only what seemed to be footage from a digital camera of someone witnessing something attacking New York City, followed by the date 1-18-08, a wave of viral marketing was released upon the public.
What is the title of the movie? What is it about? What the hell is attacking New York? These were all things people had on their minds. This past fall, when the next trailer was shown, the most concrete information viewers were given was the title of the film. This is the first aspect of what makes “Cloverfield” a successful movie: The general audience has no idea what to expect going into this movie (that is, as long as viewers stay away from spoilers).
I’m not going to reveal a lot about the plot due to the fact that knowing less makes the experience of seeing this film better. “Cloverfield,” directed by Matt Reeves, is not your typical monster movie; instead, the genre has been given new life.
While the premise of making a film appear to be a documentary has been done many times, the way in which “Cloverfield” delivers this mode of storytelling is by far the most authentic in recent movie history, due in part to the fact that the crew actually filmed the movie using digital video recorders. It almost resembles videos you would find on YouTube or MySpace.
The first scene drags on for quite a bit, but it provides the viewer with the opportunity to connect with each of the characters. Then the pace quickly picks up.
Through the use of the digital camera some viewers may feel claustrophobic. Many times the camera doesn’t show some of the action occurring, but instead makes the viewer nervous of the things they cannot see. There is a downside to the way in which the film was shot: The quick jerks and movements of the camera may make some viewers feel nauseous. If you get motion sickness fairly easily you may have a problem watching the film.
One of the most important things in a monster movie is the special effects; here they are superb. The destruction of the city seems realistic (OK, as realistic as possible in a monster movie). The monster looks menacing and is original. It doesn’t feel like it is really based on any past monster design.
The experience of “Cloverfield” doesn’t just stay in the movie theaters after it ends; there are plenty of Web sites for viewers to check out that tie into the movie, such as the chain of sites connected to a made-up Japanese corporation that may or may not have some role in the events of the movie. These provide many clues as to how the events in the movie possibly appear to be, while creating more questions for the viewer. People have been trying to tear apart all the clues since the original trailer and still no concrete answer has come about, even after the movie’s release.