The Cloverfield Paradox
It’s difficult to qualify the “Cloverfield” films as a franchise due to the fact that the first two sequels, “10 Cloverfield Lane,” and now, “The Cloverfield Paradox,” were originally written apart from the series, and it was only after J.J. Abrams and Bad Robot began developing the scripts that they turned into “Cloverfield” films. This is certainly not the first time that has happened- a LOT of sequels have started life similarly- but the result is taking what might have been interesting original films, and fitting them into a franchise they were never intended to expand on. That said, I’ve seen far worse attempts at organic sequels than these, and even if “The Cloverfield Paradox” is the worst of the three films, thus far (a fourth has already been filmed, apparently), it’s still more interesting than, say, the last two “Transformers” movies.
When the original “Cloverfield” came out 10 years ago, it hit like a shock to the system that Abrams, a successful TV voice who was just getting into making movies, just released it with little regard for traditional promotional ideas. The movie itself was a clever riff on the monster movie, and used the “found footage” aesthetic about as well as any movie has ever used it. The past two films have retained the “mystery box” promotional pushes (Hell, “Paradox” had a trailer debut during the Super Bowl, and the film was on Netflix right after the game), but their artistic merits have become more traditional than Matt Reeves’s film was, at the time. That isn’t to say “10 Cloverfield Lane” and “Cloverfield Paradox” haven’t come up with storytelling wrinkles of their own, but, knowing how they began their development, you are looking more for grafted clues and connections to the first film than coherent storytelling. That’s where both sequels have come up short, in my opinion.
“The Cloverfield Paradox,” directed by Julius Onah from a script by Oren Uziel, begins with Hamilton (Gugu Mbatha-Raw), a scientist, and Michael (Roger Davies), her husband, stuck in traffic on Earth during a time when Earth’s energy resources are diminishing. She has been afforded the opportunity to go to a space station orbiting the Earth, the Cloverfield, which is doing experiments with a particle accelerator to try and replenish Earth’s resources. We cut to her on the station with a multi-cultural crew (played by David Oyelowo, Daniel Bruhl, Chris O’Dowd, Zhang Ziyi, John Ortiz and Aksel Hennie), who has had no luck in two years of experimentation with the accelerator. One day, they achieve a stable beam, but a power surge occurs after it overloads. The next thing the crew knows, they find themselves faced with no Earth in front of them, and even stranger occurrences like one of the crew having something crawling underneath his skin, the gyroscope that helps navigation missing, and a mysterious woman (not part of their crew) named Jensen (Elizabeth Debicki) trapped in their walls. Not only do they have to figure out why everything that is happening has happened, but what may have resulted, and how they will get back.
This is actually an interesting entry in the “trapped on a space station” sub-genre of science fiction films similar to “Gravity,” “Interstellar,” “Alien” and “Event Horizon” in concept, but the execution by director Onah leaves much to be desired. There’s not a lot of genuine suspense or excitement in this film, even as the crew has more and more anomalies to contend with (including O’Dowd’s character losing his arm and the extra crew member), although there are interesting ideas at work here. And because much of the story hinges on an emotional connection Hamilton and her husband have, even though they are separated throughout much of the movie, you would hope that- especially with one, particular revelation- the film would achieve a level of the emotional storytelling that fueled “Gravity” or “Intersteller,” even if it can’t quite ratchet up the thrills of an “Alien.” Unfortunately, Onah (making his second feature) just doesn’t quite have that skill yet as a director, although he gets solid work from his actors. I just didn’t feel the urgency this film deserves, and that is unfortunate. It’s that thought that makes me wonder if the film might have been better served being developed outside of the “Cloverfield” universe under its original title, “The God Particle,” because that need to tie it into the 2008 film hampers the film, in my opinion, more than it might have helped it. It helps it get noticed more, but that doesn’t make it better. I’m curious to see if we’ll get another genuinely original “Cloverfield” movie- which is to say, one developed solely for that franchise- moving forward. I hope this might be a lesson to Abrams and crew to focus on doing their own thing like they did in 2008 rather than just co-opting others work for that purpose.
