Directed by:
Julius OnahCinematography:
Dan MindelComposer:
Bear McCrearyCast:
Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Daniel Brühl, Elizabeth Debicki, Ziyi Zhang, Chris O'Dowd, Aksel Hennie, John Ortiz, David Oyelowo, Donal Logue, Suzanne CryerVOD (1)
Plots(1)
The third entry in the loosely connected Cloverfield film series is set in the year 2028, a time when the Earth is plagued by a devastating energy crisis. The multinational crew members of an orbiting space station find their attempt to use a particle accelerator to create an infinite amount of energy has transported them to a parallel universe where they face a succession of bizarre and horrifying occurrences while trying to get back home. (Paramount Home Entertainment)
(more)Videos (1)
Reviews (11)
The Americans decided to turn the original found footage Cloverfield movie into their cash cow, so they keep shooting one flick from this universe after another. In film in particular, you have to ask yourself what the Monster has to do with a space ship flying somewhere through space. There’s really no logic in this connection. But it’s still a b-movie with the most stellar cast in the last thirty years or so. So technically it looks fine, the cast is good, but you still cannot shake the feeling that you’re watching a terrible bullshit that makes no sense. This movie is a prime example of the thin line separating good sci-fi movies with a message from pieces of horrible crap.
()
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%.
()
"My arm helped us find the Earth!" This was written and filmed by people who love not only the original Cloverfield, but all of the space adventures of Alien, starting with a conversational episode of Star Trek. The Cloverfield Paradox is a strangely likeable film that barely stands on its own two feet and comes up with the most absurd paths to connect to its predecessor, yet it’s the process of connecting to a fictional world in motion that delivers a remarkably unpredictable and entertaining game with the viewer, starting from the opening minutes and ending with a perfectly bizarre last shot. Unfortunately, given the mood and physicality of the previous episodes, this is ultimately a maddeningly uneven project, naively weaving horror elements with over-the-top humour and blatantly ripping off just about any space sci-fi despite the original premise of the overarching plot. The fact that, after the psychologically and directorially tight second one, we get an ordinary B-movie with which less talented filmmakers try to pay tribute to everything and to reveal the mystery of the monster through unconvincing dimensional portals that is simply disappointing. I appreciate a few witty ideas and the effort to maintain a similarly limited narrative that lays down more than it solves, but here it has merely "bitten" more than one good film can chew.
()
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.
()
The Cloverfield Paradox tries to be a smart film, but fails on more than one front. You can never have too many alternate reality films, but in this case I found it bland and unpolished. I was expecting a larger dose of suspense and action from a film set on a spaceship that suddenly finds itself in trouble. On the other hand, the dramatic line didn't work either (Ava and her family). In many ways, the film is similar to Life and Aliens, but qualitatively it is quite different. As a result, you sense an obvious yet untapped potential.
()
Ads