- They are huge, taller than the statue of liberty! (Need a very large space ship).
- They are not very clever. (Have the basic instincts of a wild primative animal).

- They are huge, taller than the statue of liberty! (Need a very large space ship).
- They are not very clever. (Have the basic instincts of a wild primative animal).

But even though “Cloverfield” isn’t the Godzilla-for-the-YouTube-generation picture that everyone may have been hoping for, it’s still a terrific movie, filled with spectacle and a surprising amount of humor, which makes up for its lack of terror or emotional impact.

Produced by “Lost” and “Alias” mastermind J.J. Abrams, “Cloverfield” has been one of the more interesting experiments in large-scale guerrilla filmmaking. It was completed relatively quietly (for a movie that involves the decimation of this nation’s biggest city) for a modest budget, then was introduced with a short trailer that appeared mysteriously – and namelessly – before “Transformers” in July.

When a few cryptic Web sites related to the movie appeared later in the summer, the passionate sci-fi-movie-loving community pounced, analyzing every scrap of “Cloverfield”-related minutiae that was posted online. Perhaps worried about another “Snakes on a Plane,” where the overload of hype diminished the box-office returns, the studio seemed to cool down the marketing machine considerably.

And it’s a good thing, because when you get past the hand-held camera approach, there isn’t a heck of a lot to this movie that you haven’t seen before. Many of those online “clues” appear to be red herrings. If you’ve watched “Starship Troopers,” that bad Matthew Broderick “Godzilla” movie and any episode of “Dawson’s Creek,” you won’t be surprised by the plot developments or creature design in this movie. In addition, Reeves and writer Drew Goddard chose to ignore “Blair Witch’s” the-less-the-audience-sees-the-scarier-your-movie-gets lesson, and they show every angle of the Great Evil in the first half of the film, which significantly dilutes the scare factor.

But “Cloverfield” succeeds despite these potential shortcomings, mostly because of the effective presentation. The first 15 minutes are so goopy – focusing on a fleeting romance between main character Rob and his longtime obsession Beth – that you’ll wonder at first if Abrams and his crew might have pulled off a truly epic twist, using a false trailer to disguise their party movie as a monster mash. Some of these first scenes are almost cringe-worthy, but they serve two important purposes: You’ll get to meet lots of characters in a short time and drop your guard enough that the first wave of world-ending mayhem truly does seem to come out of nowhere.

When the action begins, it comes fast, giving the characters (and audience) only a few moments to catch their breath. And even though this movie probably cost one-eighth the final bill of the average “Harry Potter” sequel, the special effects work is nearly seamless. Unlike that atrocious American-made “Godzilla” movie, you’ll be able to easily convince yourself that this all could be real.

The handful of quieter moments in “Cloverfield” are often the best, such as one great scene where a pack of looters stop to watch the television news coverage in an electronics store they’re stealing from – mouths agape and with their plunder hanging slackly in their arms. After the Hurricane Katrina debacle, it’s also nice to see the U.S. military responding to a disaster so swiftly and forcefully. New York will never be the same after the events in this movie, but George W. Bush’s approval ratings may finally top 30 percent again.

The other great call was to make Rob’s well-meaning dimwit buddy Hud the cameraman and de-facto narrator. His lines get better as the situation becomes grimmer and more chaotic, and there’s a nice running gag involving a girl he has a crush on at the party. Who knew that “Cloverfield” would be funnier than “First Sunday”?

Unfortunately Hud isn’t much of a cameraman. Hopefully when a monster really does level New York, someone will bring a Steadicam – and Errol Morris – to the party.

But even though “Cloverfield” isn’t the Godzilla-for-the-YouTube-generation picture that everyone may have been hoping for, it’s still a terrific movie, filled with spectacle and a surprising amount of humor, which makes up for its lack of terror or emotional impact.

Produced by “Lost” and “Alias” mastermind J.J. Abrams, “Cloverfield” has been one of the more interesting experiments in large-scale guerrilla filmmaking. It was completed relatively quietly (for a movie that involves the decimation of this nation’s biggest city) for a modest budget, then was introduced with a short trailer that appeared mysteriously – and namelessly – before “Transformers” in July.

When a few cryptic Web sites related to the movie appeared later in the summer, the passionate sci-fi-movie-loving community pounced, analyzing every scrap of “Cloverfield”-related minutiae that was posted online. Perhaps worried about another “Snakes on a Plane,” where the overload of hype diminished the box-office returns, the studio seemed to cool down the marketing machine considerably.

And it’s a good thing, because when you get past the hand-held camera approach, there isn’t a heck of a lot to this movie that you haven’t seen before. Many of those online “clues” appear to be red herrings. If you’ve watched “Starship Troopers,” that bad Matthew Broderick “Godzilla” movie and any episode of “Dawson’s Creek,” you won’t be surprised by the plot developments or creature design in this movie. In addition, Reeves and writer Drew Goddard chose to ignore “Blair Witch’s” the-less-the-audience-sees-the-scarier-your-movie-gets lesson, and they show every angle of the Great Evil in the first half of the film, which significantly dilutes the scare factor.

But “Cloverfield” succeeds despite these potential shortcomings, mostly because of the effective presentation. The first 15 minutes are so goopy – focusing on a fleeting romance between main character Rob and his longtime obsession Beth – that you’ll wonder at first if Abrams and his crew might have pulled off a truly epic twist, using a false trailer to disguise their party movie as a monster mash. Some of these first scenes are almost cringe-worthy, but they serve two important purposes: You’ll get to meet lots of characters in a short time and drop your guard enough that the first wave of world-ending mayhem truly does seem to come out of nowhere.

When the action begins, it comes fast, giving the characters (and audience) only a few moments to catch their breath. And even though this movie probably cost one-eighth the final bill of the average “Harry Potter” sequel, the special effects work is nearly seamless. Unlike that atrocious American-made “Godzilla” movie, you’ll be able to easily convince yourself that this all could be real.

The handful of quieter moments in “Cloverfield” are often the best, such as one great scene where a pack of looters stop to watch the television news coverage in an electronics store they’re stealing from – mouths agape and with their plunder hanging slackly in their arms. After the Hurricane Katrina debacle, it’s also nice to see the U.S. military responding to a disaster so swiftly and forcefully. New York will never be the same after the events in this movie, but George W. Bush’s approval ratings may finally top 30 percent again.

The other great call was to make Rob’s well-meaning dimwit buddy Hud the cameraman and de-facto narrator. His lines get better as the situation becomes grimmer and more chaotic, and there’s a nice running gag involving a girl he has a crush on at the party. Who knew that “Cloverfield” would be funnier than “First Sunday”?

Unfortunately Hud isn’t much of a cameraman. Hopefully when a monster really does level New York, someone will bring a Steadicam – and Errol Morris – to the party.