User Reviews (768)

Add a Review

  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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".
  • 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.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This film is the epitome of the meme: "I'm not saying it was aliens...but it was aliens."

    The ridiculous turn this film takes it the last 10 minutes completely ruins an otherwise pretty tense and gripping psychological thriller. Typical of Abrams to categorically mess up an ending though, so i shouldn't have been too surprised in all honesty.

    This film done everything right in terms of keeping you on edge, building tension and keeping you guessing. You feel just as confused and vulnerable as the protagonist and have no idea where everything is leading. But then, out of nowhere, it suddenly takes a sharp turn down towards wtf-ville and completely kills everything that it worked hard to build over the duration of the film.

    So unnecessary. So many different ways they could have wrapped it up, but they took the most ludicrous root.
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 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.
  • 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!

  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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!
  • 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.
  • I've been a little critical of The Cloverfield franchise, particularly the recent offering, The Cloverfield Paradox. However, this film has some serious quality. 10 Cloverfield Lane has intrigue, mystery, surprise, shock, masses of tension and some unexpected sequences. As you watch you start doubting what you're being fed, you wonder if Howard is telling the truth (however crazy it sounds) or if he's a run of the mill psycho. The monster element is used to tremendous effect here, it really works on all levels, especially the shock factor, its presence is woven into the story well, unlike in the Paradox, where it's merely plonked in just because. Excellent performances all round, John Goodman is terrific.

    A very enjoyable, intriguing movie, with plenty of shocks and surprises, I rate this, 9/10
  • 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.
  • 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?
  • 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.
  • I explicitly avoid watching any trailers or reading any reviews from 10 Cloverfield Lane just because I wanted to be certain to be surprised by the story. I just heard from some people that it was good and that's all I needed to know. And I'm glad I did because during the whole entire movie you wonder what is really happening. You think about all the possible scenarios and still you are never sure what is going on. I like those kind of movies, mysteries, that keep you on edge all the time. The cast did a perfect job with their respective performances. And even though there are almost no other actors then the three main ones, John Goodman, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and John Gallagher Jr, the movie never gets boring. It's full of twists and that's how I like it. One of the better ones I saw this year.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Many movie lovers will leave this film with a dilemma swirling in their mind: can a poorly conceived and poorly directed ending be ignored while you hang on to the memory of the brilliant film that almost was? In cinema, the answer is usually no because we remember a film backwards via the way the story ended. The ending is also the key to how we read a film and how we apply genre codes to make sense of cinematic storytelling. This film traverses three totally different but often compatible genres: the psychological thriller, the horror/gore, and the science fantasy, in that order. Note that the last one is not the same as science fiction, a respectable genre that creatively draws on the logic of science. The film 10 Cloverfield Lane (2016) starts brilliantly as a thriller, drops a gear or two as horror, and then has an inexcusable brain-snap as mediocre science fantasy.

    The linear plot line opens with soon-to-be-married Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) walking out on her fiancé only to drive straight into a horrific car crash. She wakes chained inside a bunker and is held captive by Howard (John Goodman), a doomsday prophet who built the sealed underground structure in anticipation of a major global event. He eventually convinces her that the outside world is now a post-apocalyptic and uninhabitable mess. His neighbour Emmett (John Gallagher) is the only other actor and becomes a confidante for Michelle, but not for long. For the first three- quarters of the film, tension builds then flattens while Michelle becomes accepting of her plight in a claustrophobic space that has all the comforts of home. When Howard's temper shifts into horror and gore mode, Michelle takes flight only to stumble into a B-grade science fantasy created with last century computer graphics. Everything this film achieves in terms of emotional tension, doubt, confusion, and of course, unbridled fear…goes up in a puff a smoke.

    John Goodman's imposing girth, menacing bluster and steely gaze entertainingly convey total terror with enough glimpses of 'Mr nice-guy' to create confusion. For the most part Mary Elizabeth Winstead ably reflects vulnerability, disbelief and fear, although she settles into domesticity rather too easily. The early unfolding story sustains a level of plausibility, even when Howard starts going weird. The real thrill in this film, however, is watching it crash and burn in the last twenty minutes as it runs out of ideas and takes a bad turn in the hope that the applause of science fantasy fans will drown out the boos of thriller fans. But neither group wins as the ending transforms this film into an incoherent and unforgivable mess.
  • 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!
  • *Spoilers further ahead so read at your own risk!* I just got out of the cinema after catching the late show of this film on a Saturday night. Now, let me just start off by saying that I have walked out of movies I hated before, sat through movies I hated right until the very end, and movies I absolutely praised to the heavens (I think all of us have been in all of these 3 categories at least once in our lives when it comes to movies).

    However, a fourth category has now emerged for me and reared its ugly head - and it is perhaps the worst one of them all! When it comes to "10 Cloverfield Lane", this was the very first time I've EVER sat through a movie for its near-2 hour running time, in complete tension and suspense, only for the last 30 minutes to come unhinged so abruptly and vapidly.

    Why were so many plot elements introduced throughout the film if absolutely none (and I mean NONE) of them were addressed? This is the problem with filmmakers nowadays - many of them have the ability and talent to showcase excellent traits of a movie, such as atmosphere or good casting choices (as is the case with this movie. More on that later). But none of them have the ability to tie it all together into a cohesive story. Boring and incomprehensible are two things this movie is NOT, but that still doesn't mask the fact that the filmmaker had no idea where he was going with this, and that's very clear from the outset.

    Comedy was interspersed throughout the film in little sprinkles, but none of it manifested into anything remotely humorous, given the circumstances. Many films work under the pretense of adding a black comedy component, but it simply doesn't work here.

    And then we get the absolute worst ending I've ever seen - what were we supposed to take away from this? That our female heroine suddenly has "combat skills" and "medical expertise" just because she can crawl through a tiny ventilation system and treat a cut with stitches? Is it supposed to be a rush of sudden girl power? GIVE ME A BREAK! The main protagonist wasn't even the least bit likable, which slightly alienated me from the start. What was the point of the subplot having to do with Michelle's husband calling her repeatedly before the events of the film? Or the one about Howard's-daughter-Megan-that-turned-out-not-to-be-his-real-daughter? Or something like that.

    Do any of these things really matter anyway? Nope, because none of them were addressed! And this is what I'm talking about when I say that there was no semblance of a cohesive story. There wee very trace amounts of character depth or perception illustrated here - just a case of more questions being asked than answered, followed by a hallmark of trite clichés to wrap things up before the culmination of the 103 minute runtime. And then.... aliens????? REALLY???

    Now, for the one big positive about this film - John Goodman's performance. He didn't fail to impress here, as per usual, but with a script this lackluster not even his overpowering tour-de-force can save this one. I wish that were the case, though.
An error has occured. Please try again.