The Cloverfield Paradox

It was passable. Although it has almost nothing in common with the previous episodes and is clearly the weakest, it's still watchable. Story-wise, it's a rip-off of all the better known sci-fi properties, but the kills are pretty good. Visually it's OK, and the crew is also passable, there's always something going on, so there's no boredom either, so an average three stars without a problem. 55% (27/02/2018)

It’s terribly unfocused. The first half is satisfying overall – you can see the production values, the actors are decent and there are a couple of relatively interesting ideas. Unfortunately, it ends up strangely splitting into individual episodes where there’s always someone whose job is to scream, all while running around in the generic interiors of a spaceship. In a better written film, the final conflict between the astronauts of the first and second dimensions could have been a central premise, the basis of a fantastic dilemma and a suffocating atmosphere. But not in this film, which carefully walks around the interesting themes. The connection with Cloverfield is a decent base, but not very well delivered. I’m rating it at about 50%, I’m disappointed with the resulting quality of the film, though that could have been expected given the delays and the release straight to Netflix. (06/02/2018)

It’s good, but far from excellent. I was actually expecting a lot worse, which may have lowered the bar. Imperfect for sure, and the logic is also quite flawed... (where did O'Dowd's hand get the information about the gyroscope, for example, well?), but it is nice to look at. It’s visually stunning and the cast led by Brühl and Elizabeth Debicki is fine too. Actually, only Gugu is pretty bland and he’s the lead! The talked-about connection with Cloverfield was very strong, but fortunately not so much that it was distracting. The plot had a much higher potential, but it turned out to be like a Stargate Atlantis episode of Daedalus squared, with better effects and a few extra scares. Onah should work on the themes and leave the direction to someone who can do it better. (19/02/2023)

All right, I'll round those three and a half stars up. The Cloverfield Paradox is, in my opinion, a deliberate tribute to the B sci-fi films of the 1950s, when the spaceship failed to keep itself in space without strings or wire and where the worst paid member of the staff was sweating in every giant rubber monster. But the trashy plot didn't bother me at all, and the actors I think acted exactly how they were supposed to. It's too bad that the serious situation game didn't last all the time and that it had to be interrupted primarily by unfunny escapades around one amputated but still alive hand (“Will it grow back?" belongs more to Monty Python or the Simpsons, not here), because otherwise I was quite satisfied. I liked the ending (aside from the last shot) very much and would say I won't have a problem watching the film again. (06/01/2019)

The world revolving around the Cloverfield monster fascinates me. The first film brought a fresh and intense action experience, while the second delivered a gripping thriller with an atmosphere that was almost palpable. The third installment appeared out of nowhere, and I wasn’t expecting it, which made it even more surprising. But honestly, I was expecting a much more intense film. The space setting was quite good, but the script sometimes felt almost absurd. The cast might not be full of big names (except for Daniel Brühl), but don’t be fooled. Although I didn’t expect to form any attachment to the characters, I did. The story takes place in 2028 and mainly revolves around jumping from one dimension to another and the subsequent effects. It had a more than decent pace (though it fell into the classic slasher mode in the second half), the ship’s environment felt quite claustrophobic, and the visual effects could be considered above average. However, one might wonder why this belongs in the same category as the previous two Cloverfield films. If there weren’t any hints (and I’m not just talking about the ending, which I’m still unsure about), you might not categorize it that way. I’d mark that as the film’s biggest drawback, along with the plot holes. Otherwise, the film was entertaining; the idea with the hand wasn’t bad (though the hand skittering across the floor seemed ridiculous). Objectively, it deserves a solid three stars, but due to the somewhat inexplicable low rating here, I’m giving it a weaker four. 70%. (13/02/2018)