I`ve always regarded John Goodman as a sort of modern Basil Rathbone (albeit a rather more rotund one obviously) in that (like Rathbone back in the 1930`s and 40`s) Goodman is able to play both good geezers and bad geezers equally convincingly, surprisingly not an easy thing for an actor to achieve.
Hmmm. Your review is very ambiguous. The trailer has been shown many times on TV and it gives away a lot so I already know some of what I shouldn't know according to you. Based on the TV ad I thought it was a sequel to Cloverfield -- that horrid, pseudo-apocalyptic, space monster movie that seemed to be 80% improvised by untalented actors. Hated that! J. J. Abrams says 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE is a "blood relative" of Cloverfield. What on earth does that mean? It was originally titled THE CELLAR. Seems the title change is meant to make a connection to CLOVERFIELD. I'm not sure it's a good idea. Based on all the internet stories I've read it doesn't sound like the nonsensical monster movie I hated though the trailer has been edited to make it look *a lot" like a sequel. Clever marketing move that will probably end up pissing off a lot of young movie fans who loved the other movie.
BTW... "Jennifer Croissant, et al." bores the hell out of me. Why don't you delete all those comments?
Trying not to provoke what has only been innocuous comments so far. I know they come from the UK and wonder if it's the same one who put fairly disgusting comments on here last year. I hate to make it a closed blog again. It is a pretty good movie. Tight writing, good acting. Don't want to give it away. And I would categorize it as suspense rather than as science fiction or horror.
I cant believe Mary Elizabeth Winstead is 31 already, it literally only seems like yesterday that she was a fresh-faced 18 year-old cheerleader!.
ReplyDeleteI`ve always regarded John Goodman as a sort of modern Basil Rathbone (albeit a rather more rotund one obviously) in that (like Rathbone back in the 1930`s and 40`s) Goodman is able to play both good geezers and bad geezers equally convincingly, surprisingly not an easy thing for an actor to achieve.
ReplyDeleteVery curious about this
ReplyDeleteThe two commenter(s) above are trolls, I'm afraid.
ReplyDeleteI thought it quite good. Unpredictable and well written.
But good trolls, it seems.
ReplyDeleteI might see it this afternoon. Theater's half a block from my apt.
I would not have thought this was your kind of movie.
ReplyDeleteMy review of 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE will be up on my blog next Tuesday.
ReplyDeleteHmmm. Your review is very ambiguous. The trailer has been shown many times on TV and it gives away a lot so I already know some of what I shouldn't know according to you. Based on the TV ad I thought it was a sequel to Cloverfield -- that horrid, pseudo-apocalyptic, space monster movie that seemed to be 80% improvised by untalented actors. Hated that! J. J. Abrams says 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE is a "blood relative" of Cloverfield. What on earth does that mean? It was originally titled THE CELLAR. Seems the title change is meant to make a connection to CLOVERFIELD. I'm not sure it's a good idea. Based on all the internet stories I've read it doesn't sound like the nonsensical monster movie I hated though the trailer has been edited to make it look *a lot" like a sequel. Clever marketing move that will probably end up pissing off a lot of young movie fans who loved the other movie.
ReplyDeleteBTW... "Jennifer Croissant, et al." bores the hell out of me. Why don't you delete all those comments?
Trying not to provoke what has only been innocuous comments so far. I know they come from the UK and wonder if it's the same one who put fairly disgusting comments on here last year. I hate to make it a closed blog again.
ReplyDeleteIt is a pretty good movie. Tight writing, good acting. Don't want to give it away.
And I would categorize it as suspense rather than as science fiction or horror.