Siverfale
Auto-translated
10 Cloverfield Lane
When I was 15 and went to the cinema, I really liked a movie that was released in Russia under the title "Monstro." This film didn't become very famous or popular, and although a quick check on Wikipedia told me that the film was a box office success (170 million dollars in revenue against a 25 million dollar budget), I heard very little about it. The original title of the film was "Cloverfield," so when I learned about a recently released film with a similar title, I immediately understood and decided to watch it.
At first, I wanted to criticize our translators for not even trying to maintain consistency in their own translations and for translating the film as "Cloverfield Lane," but then I realized that calling the film "Monstro 2" would also be wrong, since the monster itself plays a very minor role here.
Now, about the film itself. At first, I liked the cool visualization and the way the shots were framed, although I'm not a sophisticated film buff and don't usually pay much attention to such things. The editor, apparently, thought the same way, so after the cool moments at the beginning, it didn't offer anything particularly interesting. The plot developed well, but without any particular highlights. There are few characters, but they don't stand out in any special way; there's not much more to say about the film. The ending was terribly predictable, and when the escape scene from the bunker copied "Divide," only without the epic scale, it became even sadder. However, "Divide" failed at the American box office, so it can be copied in successful films, right?
In principle, the film isn't that bad; I don't regret watching it, but I could have just as easily not watched it.
When I was 15 and went to the cinema, I really liked a movie that was released in Russia under the title "Monstro." This film didn't become very famous or popular, and although a quick check on Wikipedia told me that the film was a box office success (170 million dollars in revenue against a 25 million dollar budget), I heard very little about it. The original title of the film was "Cloverfield," so when I learned about a recently released film with a similar title, I immediately understood and decided to watch it.
At first, I wanted to criticize our translators for not even trying to maintain consistency in their own translations and for translating the film as "Cloverfield Lane," but then I realized that calling the film "Monstro 2" would also be wrong, since the monster itself plays a very minor role here.
Now, about the film itself. At first, I liked the cool visualization and the way the shots were framed, although I'm not a sophisticated film buff and don't usually pay much attention to such things. The editor, apparently, thought the same way, so after the cool moments at the beginning, it didn't offer anything particularly interesting. The plot developed well, but without any particular highlights. There are few characters, but they don't stand out in any special way; there's not much more to say about the film. The ending was terribly predictable, and when the escape scene from the bunker copied "Divide," only without the epic scale, it became even sadder. However, "Divide" failed at the American box office, so it can be copied in successful films, right?
In principle, the film isn't that bad; I don't regret watching it, but I could have just as easily not watched it.
Where do we go?
Where do we end up when we save the world?
Where do we end up when we save the world?