Cloverfield was a pretty good movie that doesn’t stand up well to multiple viewings (and with a 70% drop from week #1 to week #2, most people didn’t bother seeing it a second time). The film was a creative idea that capitalized on the novelty of the premise (the whole movie shot from the perspective of a handycam, following a bunch of friends in a quest to save the lead character’s love interest in the midst of a monster attack on New York City).
I liked the film, but have absolutely no desire to see a sequel (but who am I kidding, if it’s sci-fi I’ll be there opening day almost no matter what it is). The novelty is now gone. It’s been done. But when a movie makes almost $100 million dollars and it only cost about $50 million to make and market, you know they’ll make another one (wouldn’t you?).
Anyway, its been confirmed that Drew Goddard will be back to write the second film. “Who is Drew Goddard?” you might ask? Well, he wrote Cloverfield. “But I thought JJ Abrams wrote Cloverfield?” you may ask. Nope. “So JJ Abrams directed Cloverfield?” Nope. Matt Reeves did. It’s still amazing how many people assume Abrams wrote or directed this thing. He didn’t.
Anyway… your thoughts? Are you pumped for a sequel? Even if you did or didn’t like the original, does a Cloverfield 2 excite you?
User comment: By: bert belgiumyes, yes, YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!
User comment: By: Mr.DeathIf they do another style of filming and not the same thing from a different perspective, It could be neat-o. But besides that, I don't know
User comment: By: Darren J SeeleyOkay! Glad you asked! Here goes. You better sit down for this! **** The Cloverfield monster gobbles up unsuspecting lunch as the human veal records her demise on her cellphone camera. As she dies, the monster chews the wrong way, the hand -with the cellphone still in it- gets severed and lodges in front of one of the teeth, kind of like that celery string that gets in between your gums. The cellphone (or camcorder) records video as the beast lumbers about, tearing up shit. Gobbles up some more folks, gobble gobble. Yum Yum. The cellphone (or camcorder) then slowly rides down on the beast's drool. Later on, this video is found...and compiled with other video devices taken from the creature's droppings, not unlike of getting the phone of of the dino crap in Jurassic Park 3....
User comment: By: ALAN SMITHEEOkay. You have the floor. Go for it, Seeler.
User comment: By: Darren J SeeleyBut at this stage, we're looking for something (a concept?) that can be as fresh/as surprising as the first movie.Go on, ask the Seeler braintrust. I dare you. I double triple dare you....
User comment: By: JasonAbso-freaking-lutely. I, too, saw Cloverfield twice John, and enjoyed it every bit as much if not moreso (seeing as how I knew to take a dramamine the second time!). Different strokes for different folks, I suppose.
User comment: By: Butter On My PopcornThey should shoot the sequel the same way they shot "Children of Men." It should have plenty of long uncut action scenes. This gives the same feeling that the handycam gives you without all the shaky bullshit. Otherwise, they better make sure whoever owns the camera in the sequel also owns a steady cam.
User comment: By: calviinYes. (actually, I don't know, but I want to be the first (and probably only) Yes).
Visit here to subscribe to these commentsUser comment: By: KinooHey ya all US friends, Today was the press junket interview with Matt Reeves in Paris (Cloverfield is released this Wednesday), and I had to interview the director. As the alst question, I asked him: "As for the sequel, what can we expect? Another secret footages from another monster in another city, Paris maybe?" He answered: "Paris would be pretty cool, but I think a Tokyo thing could be awesome too. But at this stage, we're looking for something (a concept?) that can be as fresh/as surprising as the first movie. Those are not the exact words (i can't remember all of it) but well... I let u know when the video is online (on Commeaucinema.com). Seeya