Metascore
64

Generally favorable reviews - based on 37 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 26 out of 37
  2. Negative: 4 out of 37
  1. No movie this year will better embody Macbeth's description of life itself: "a tale ... full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
  2. 30
    It pretends to examine how self-absorbed we are as a culture, only to be consumed by its own self-absorption. It's also badly constructed, humorless and emotionally sadistic .
  3. Like too many big-studio productions, Cloverfield works as a showcase for impressively realistic-looking special effects, a realism that fails to extend to the scurrying humans whose fates are meant to invoke pity and fear but instead inspire yawns and contempt. Rarely have I rooted for a monster with such enthusiasm.
  4. Reviewed by: John Anderson
    30
    Cloverfield is a relentless, I-thought-my-eyeballs-were-bleeding exercise in visual disorientation.
User Score
6.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 806 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Oct 16, 2011
    7
    This right here is a very under-rated movie. It was a very cool and successful expeiriment that I thought did exceedingly well. It not only kept my attention and stayed interesting throughout the whole thing, it began a new era of film. It brought the idea of making the movie look like it was home videoed to the attention of the film industry. I also love the producer(J.J. Abrams) and the director did well with this movie too(Matt Reeves). So after all of that about how good it is your probably asking yourself, "why did he give it a 7/10?" Well the movie isn't completely perfect. I thought for one it could have been a bit longer. It only being like one hour and 10 minutes was kinda a let down. Also, I know it was like home videoed but there was a little too much zooming in and out and shaking of the camera. It didn't have the best angles either. It also was hard to see I feel like. The only time you can watch it is if your in a dark area because in a lot of the parts the glare makes it hard to see the screen and whats going on. One more thing is the actors. They didn't do the best job of acting in this. I guess most of them were just begginning actoras and actresses but they could have done a little better. The only one that did a professional job was Lizzy Caplin(Marlena). She was pretty good in it but then again she has been in a couple of movies before this one. She's not the best acteress though for sure. There is many others better than her, no defense Lizzy. I guess T.J. Miller(Hud) had done a prett y good job too. He had also been in a few movies before too. So those are a few things that this movie lacks and if they make a remake... add these please. So this movie is a pretty good movie with a good plotline and amazing special effects. I highly reccommend you see it. Full Review »
  2. Sep 17, 2011
    5
    I admit the movie was a crazy, thrilling ride. However, just because "Cloverfield" was filmed in first person perspective doesn't mean it is a good movie. Full Review »
  3. Dec 1, 2010
    10
    This is one roller coaster ride. Although this does require a suspension of disbelief because this was on-camera monster attack on NYC, It made me believe it actually happened. This movie was scary, thrilling, emotional, and just plain freakin awesome! I didnt mind the ending whatsoever. Awesome movie. Full Review »