There is a strong argument to be made for Cloverfield being one of the most significant sci-fi films of the twenty-first century if we dissect the movie into its numerous creative elements and then look at their individual inspirations and triumphs over the intervening 14 years.
Matt Reeves directed a feature for the first time in 12 years with the found footage creature feature, and he hasn^/t fared too poorly since then. In a similar vein, it was Drew Goddard^/s debut script for a major motion picture. Goddard has since contributed to a large number of important productions as a screenwriter, producer, or director.

In addition, despite having a sizable $250+ million development deal with Warner Bros., J.J. Abrams has essentially been stealing money from the studio by delivering little to nothing despite it. Cloverfield was only Bad Robot^/s second cinematic effort as a production company (and first in the seven years since cult favourite horror Joy Ride).
No one in their right mind could dispute that Cloverfield has had a significant impact on contemporary film after adding in an extended franchise that includes 10 Cloverfield Lane, The Cloverfield Paradox, and the upcoming mysterious direct sequel, as well as a $172 million box office haul on a $25 million budget as compensation for an outstanding marketing campaign.
However, that is not the core of the discussion taking place on Reddit. Fans are debating Cloverfield^/s creative merits instead of discussing the film^/s influence. Is it a hyped-up, clumsy, B-tier monster mash with an A-list pedigree? Or does it merit its Certified Fresh Rotten Tomatoes rating and fame as a minor classic by producing the greatest amount of suspense, dread, and fireworks on a comparatively low budget?

A consensus isn^/t exactly near given how intense the debate is becoming, but it^/s still interesting to see how modern moviegoers feel about the movie over 15 years after it first came out.