This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.washingtonpost.com/goingoutguide/movies/10-cloverfield-lane-monsters-just-outside--and-inside--the-bunker-door/2016/03/10/ecd393ba-e6d7-11e5-bc08-3e03a5b41910_story.html

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
‘10 Cloverfield Lane’: Monsters just outside — and inside — the bunker door ‘10 Cloverfield Lane’: Monsters just outside — and inside — the bunker door
(35 minutes later)
If “10 Cloverfield Lane” is, as J.J. Abrams has described it, a “blood relative” of the producer’s thriller “Cloverfield,” it’s a bit more grown-up than that found-footage monster movie. While scary and intense, the 2008 tale about a group of 20-somethings making their way through a Manhattan under attack by a creature straight out of Japan’s Toho Studios was annoyingly mannered, with dark and grainy hand-held camerawork matched only in its awkwardness by a script consisting largely of people shouting, “Oh, my God!” If “10 Cloverfield Lane” is, as J.J. Abrams has described it, a “blood relative” of the producer’s thriller “Cloverfield,” it’s a bit more grown-up than that found-footage monster movie. Although scary and intense, the 2008 tale about a group of 20-somethings making their way through a Manhattan that’s under attack by a creature straight out of Japan’s Toho Studios was annoyingly mannered, with dark and grainy hand-held-camerawork matched only in its awkwardness by a script consisting largely of people shouting, “Oh, my God!”
While apparently neither a sequel nor a prequel, “10 Cloverfield Lane” shares the earlier film’s DNA in that here, too, be monsters. The less said about them the better, for anyone hoping to avoid spoilers, but one looks like a cross between a pygmy hippo, a lamprey and a mirror ball. Some come in human form. While apparently neither a sequel nor a prequel, “10 Cloverfield Lane” shares the earlier film’s DNA in that here, too, be monsters. The less said about them the better, for anyone hoping to avoid spoilers, but: One looks like a cross between a pygmy hippo, a lamprey and a mirror ball. Some come in human form.
Fortunately, the main actors — John Goodman, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and John Gallagher Jr. as a trio of subterranean bunker dwellers trying to hide out from an unspecified aboveground attack — are all top notch, delivering believably nuanced performances that range from the touching to the hilarious (and, eventually, to the harrowing). The filmmaking, by first-time feature director Dan Trachtenberg, is suitably claustrophobic and suspenseful, working up to a level of stress that may be unhealthy for anyone with a weak heart. And the dialogue (by Josh Campbell, Damien Chazelle and Matthew Stuecken) is sophisticated enough to allow room for moments of quiet reflection in between all the bats-in-the-belfry crazy.Fortunately, the main actors — John Goodman, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and John Gallagher Jr. as a trio of subterranean bunker dwellers trying to hide out from an unspecified aboveground attack — are all top notch, delivering believably nuanced performances that range from the touching to the hilarious (and, eventually, to the harrowing). The filmmaking, by first-time feature director Dan Trachtenberg, is suitably claustrophobic and suspenseful, working up to a level of stress that may be unhealthy for anyone with a weak heart. And the dialogue (by Josh Campbell, Damien Chazelle and Matthew Stuecken) is sophisticated enough to allow room for moments of quiet reflection in between all the bats-in-the-belfry crazy.
There are a few false notes. If the screenplay attempts to explain away the air filtration system that allows the protagonists to breathe after the atmosphere has become poisoned through a reference to an “aquaponic system,” that allusion, while silly, is certainly no more preposterous than many examples of sci-fi mumbo-jumbo in other films. Most of the film is far more relatable.There are a few false notes. If the screenplay attempts to explain away the air filtration system that allows the protagonists to breathe after the atmosphere has become poisoned through a reference to an “aquaponic system,” that allusion, while silly, is certainly no more preposterous than many examples of sci-fi mumbo-jumbo in other films. Most of the film is far more relatable.
That’s because the people in it, despite their extreme circumstances, are very real.That’s because the people in it, despite their extreme circumstances, are very real.
Goodman’s Howard is the patriarch of the film’s little family, which also consists of Michelle (Winstead), a woman fleeing a bad marriage who wakes up from a car accident to find herself handcuffed to a pipe in Howard’s lair, and Emmett (Gallagher), a handyman who had helped Howard build the fallout shelter when it became clear (to Howard, if no one else) that the sky was falling.Goodman’s Howard is the patriarch of the film’s little family, which also consists of Michelle (Winstead), a woman fleeing a bad marriage who wakes up from a car accident to find herself handcuffed to a pipe in Howard’s lair, and Emmett (Gallagher), a handyman who had helped Howard build the fallout shelter when it became clear (to Howard, if no one else) that the sky was falling.
At first, Howard — who insists that his motives are altruistic, despite those cuffs — seems to be the only person certain about how bad things have gotten up top. At one point, Emmett, the film’s comic relief, wisecracks to Michelle that their benefactor has a “black belt in conspiracy theory.” Though Howard makes allusions to “Martians,” he does seems, initially, sane enough. And when a woman (Suzanne Cryer) shows up banging on his door with the skin on her face peeling off, it starts to look like he may be right. Goodman’s performance, while unhinged, never veers into caricature. Similarly, Winstead avoids the cliche of the tank-top-wearing bimbo/victim, bringing an earthy self-reliance to her role. At first, Howard — who insists that his motives are altruistic, despite those cuffs — seems to be the only person certain about how bad things have gotten up top. At one point, Emmett, the film’s comic relief, wisecracks to Michelle that their benefactor has a “black belt in conspiracy theory.” Although Howard makes allusions to “Martians,” he seems, initially, sane enough. And when a woman (Suzanne Cryer) shows up banging on his door with the skin on her face peeling off, it starts to look like he may be right. Goodman’s performance, while unhinged, never veers into caricature. Similarly, Winstead avoids the cliche of the tank-top-wearing bimbo/victim, bringing an earthy self-reliance to her role.
Like “Cloverfield,” “10 Cloverfield Lane” raises almost as many questions as it answers. Where are these monsters from, and what do they want? Both films look at the world in a form of tunnel vision: “Cloverfield” through the lens of a camcorder, and “10 Cloverfield Lane” through the smudged glass window of an underground bunker. Questions about what is going on in the broader world, while lingering long after the closing credits, are less interesting, at least in this latest film, than the ones that have to do with the way we treat one another. Like “Cloverfield,” “10 Cloverfield Lane” raises almost as many questions as it answers. Where are these monsters from, and what do they want? Both films look at the world in a form of tunnel vision: “Cloverfield,” through the lens of a camcorder, and “10 Cloverfield Lane” through the smudged glass window of an underground bunker. Questions about what is going on in the broader world, which linger long after the closing credits, are less interesting, at least in this latest film, than the ones that have to do with the way we treat one another.
10 Cloverfield Lane (103 minutes, at area theaters) is rated R for frightening images, violence, threatening behavior and some coarse language.10 Cloverfield Lane (103 minutes, at area theaters) is rated R for frightening images, violence, threatening behavior and some coarse language.