As most of you movie freaks have read, a sequel is possibly coming. After seeing the 1st film only a few weeks ago now.
Variety is reporting that Matt Reeves is in talks with Paramount to bring us a sequel to our favorite new monster movie.
For a 25 million dollar project to make more than 40 million in its first weekend at the box office is a great accomplishment. Especially with only viral marketing on the web. Which most of had nothing to do with the actual film.
“With a $25 million budget, a strong concept and cast of unknowns, “Cloverfield” scored a $46 million opening frame, which was a record for a Martin Luther King Jr. holiday weekend. Paramount gave away almost no first-dollar gross, making the film a bargain for the studio.”
While we here at AP have enjoyed the film, sorry AC Thomas, we have discussed it further at another board and don’t think the sequel would be needed, or good for that matter.
So here are some thoughts about a sequel I have read on forums, sites or come up with myself.
1. Show us a different point of view. It could come from the military, a different group of friends, maybe a helicopter’s vantage point?
2. Show us what happens during Hammer Down.
The above are just some of the things I have read BUT, I don’t want them to ruin the fanatasy of the film by telling us where it came from and why its here etc. That is my favorite part of the film. The not knowing allows my mind to take the movie to places that someone else,s may not. That is the beauty of something as simple as this. Bring some ideas into my head and let my imagination do the rest.
Lets see where Paramount takes this with Reeves back at the helm. More to come as we hear it!
Ok, first off I didn’t like Cloverfield, simply because it didn’t make sense. Nothing was explained and so many questions were unanswered. If you look at the boxoffice grosses, you will see that I am not alone as there was a 70% decline in sales from opening week.
As for a Cloverfield 2, I think it is entirely necessary. I need closure. I want to know what happened. But what I fear is, just a rehash of Cloverfield 1, now that would suck.
Stan Lee seems to profoundly speak for the masses when adressing the fact that the movoe offered no explanation or closure to the limited story. However Lee, your complaints hold little weight when realizing most others knew that such a limited amount of story is exactly what Abrams & Reeves wanted from the beginning. What we saw on the screens was what whatever data was retrieved from the SD Card from the camera left in Central Park after the “Hammer Down’ Protocol went into effect. The story was done this way to seperate it from other monster movies, specifically any & all from the Godzilla franchise. The sheer amount of information (or rather lack-there-of) along with no ‘real’ story (plus the fact that, at the VERY end of the film, a transmission could be heard that clarifies that the creature is not dead) means that a sequel was inevitable.
I agree 100% with FallenRonin. It is, in my eyes, unfortunate that Stan-Lee did not understand what the movie was or what the movie was supposed to be about. I think it reads as a short story would, describing one group of friends’ experience on the night that a monster came to New York. This is a different vantage point, giving us a look at what happens to the little people in a large tragedy.