6 Reasons 10 Cloverfield Lane Is Actually Better Than the Original Film

Considering the fact that the world is ending, it's pretty incredible how focused and zoomed in the film stays. We only get to see the small world of the bunker. There are no broad, sweeping views of giant cities crumbling. We don't see a shot of the gargantuan alien army descending from space. That takes restraint, and it pays off. It's kind of like the first Cloverfield: sure, there's a giant monster attacking the city, but we're almost too wrapped up in the protagonist's mission to find and save his ex-girlfriend to care.

It remedies a greater problem with many of these large-scale action movies. There are thousands and thousands of casualties. Death becomes meaningless, inconsequential. When your whole world is an underground bunker with three characters, though, it matters. That's what makes the story compelling. That's what makes the idea of loss monumental. It makes for great, powerful storytelling.

Listen, Cloverfield came out when the "found footage" style was extremely popular and prevalent. I don't doubt the decision to tell that particular story in that particular way. And in Cloverfield's case, it was pretty well done. I will say this, though: I think the style is, on the whole, very weak. It gets tired fast. I have yet to see a found-footage film in which these thoughts don't occur to me: "Why are they still filming? Why do they have a camera still?"

Films will find flimsy ways to justify it, sure. The main character wants to "document" this, so everyone knows what's happened. Look, I'm just saying I'd abandon a camera the very first second a monster started destroying my city. I'm trying to survive, not make a documentary.

The fact that 10 Cloverfield Lane doesn't lean on this gimmick really bodes well for its success. It gives the film room to be more artful, more careful with its shots. I felt more immersed in the world of the bunker, oddly enough.

For the entire duration of the movie, I was at the edge of my seat. Within the first 10 minutes, I was blindsided by Michelle's car accident, and the tension never gives slack from there. Howard's unpredictability is a constant source of stress. Michelle makes her first escape attempt in the first 30 minutes. Even at the end of the film, Michelle still barely scrapes by through a handful of harrowing encounters that left me gasping for breath. None of it felt cheap — at least, not to me.

Some might argue that the characters are stereotypical. I see the validity in it, but I also think each star did an utterly fantastic job of fleshing out his or her respective role. This goes especially for John Goodman. He isn't just your average redneck conspiracy theorist — he's so much more. Goodman weaves in various physical quirks and idiosyncracies. You can see his mind working. I don't know how else to explain except to say that I believed Howard is a real person. I think that's a rare victory in the acting world.

In the original film, there was no doubt that a monster was destroying NYC. In 10 Cloverfield Lane, the danger is a little less clear and present and a little more subtle. Here's the thing: we all assumed this film would be a Cloverfield sequel, but only because of the title. The original trailer didn't really give any indication of how the two connect. Even though there are bits of evidence to support Howard's claims, it's hard to believe him. He's so unhinged and unstable, it seems almost impossible that he's right. On some level, I suspected that maybe Michelle would get outside and everything would be fine.

The best part about 10 Cloverfield Lane is we get what we're expecting, but at the same time, we don't. The ending broadens the scope. There's room for a sequel, but I don't need one. The third film could build even more, but I'd be just as excited to see another tiny puzzle piece of the story. That's a really powerful thing.