Comments on: Cloverfield Director Matt Reeves Already Talking Sequel!

By: Vance

Vance — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 19:32:07 +0000

Considering the video was found as part of a government file, why not pick it up from the government reviewing the evidence i.e. the video, and follow the military film crew that documents the battle against the thing or maybe the over enthusiastic TV reporter who is willing to tail the military and risk their life to get footage (almost like that seen in Spielberg’s “War of the Worlds” when Tom Cruise runs into the News truck and gets the 411 on the walkers). Either way I think it should be told from the govt. point of view considering Abrahms has experience with making government agencies look different like “Alias”. Since the main character was set to take the job with the Japanese company resposible for releasing/creating the monster (see virals for “Slusho”) maybe he can be the one to crack the origins of the monster using his “connections” as VP (assuming it was Rob? who said “It’s still alive” at the end of creditsand he’s still alive)

Got it: Sequel starts with government interviewing Rob after finding him and film footage in Central Park, Jennifer Garner and Rob go undercover at SLUSHO to find out what happened and give the monster a brain freeze which will kill it!

By: CGI minion

CGI minion — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 11:42:07 +0000

sequel?…the tape is being veiwed by the govts of the world along with everything else recovered from NY[so they mustve sent in troops to recover stuff like this ..obviously] in other words THEY dont know what it is either..pt2

…or if james cameron gets hold of it.. hopefully not … the tape its found amogst aincent archives ..futuristic marine go in to kill it…find loads of em.etc etc lol

By: Pano

Pano — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 04:12:08 +0000

Zane,

Rob didn’t die. After the credits are played there is a short audio clip of him saying “What now?”, and, when played in reverse (in classic Abrams style) he says “It’s still alive…”.

A+ Film, by the way.

By: steveJ

steveJ — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 01:16:02 +0000

The best way to kill a movie franchise is to make a sequel.

By: zane

zane — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 20:24:17 +0000

I think that after they died in the tunnel at the end they should have showed the death or whatever of the monster, the after math and what it really was, because the movie was great and i loved the whole documentary aspect of the movie, but I still wanted them to “step-back” and tell me all of those things, instead of another movie.

By: Sean

Sean — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:11:05 +0000

um phantom_pr dont mean to be rude but that wasnt the monster. on imdb it says taht JJ Abrams stated that it was the satilite used in the viral marketing. but good eye for catchin it. btw a sequel would be good if it explained a few things wthout ruining the magic of the monster. because if this is to become americas monster like godzillas is for japan, the creators need to think of a way to make this a successful franchise

By: phantom_pr

phantom_pr — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:04:42 +0000

im not sure people were paying attention at the end of the movie, you could see something fall from the sky and hit the water. thats for the people still wondering where the monster came from.

By: Becca

Becca — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 05:53:54 +0000

Um, a sequal would ruin the movie for me. Why explain things that are meant to be left unexplained? The whole point was to not know what this thing was…

By: Vanessa

Vanessa — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 00:48:20 +0000

At the end of the credits, someone says(I think its Rob) “What now?”

By: jack

jack — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 23:20:12 +0000

i loved it ,,great way to make a movie,,,just a little to much camara jiggle,,monster looked great,,poeple were not that stupid,,,get over the 9 11 crap,,,its a monster!!!!!as far as i know they tend to make a mess of things!!!

By: rublind

rublind — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:57:49 +0000

I didn’t catch the audio bleep after the movie.

Can anyone tell me what it said, or what happened exactly?

(Sorry if this was posted above, I just skimmed)

Thanks.

By: Tom

Tom — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 09:03:10 +0000

Just saw the movie. Good message. The human race is not ready for anything, especially a huge monster that drips a chase you down and tear you up virus. Also I was surprised there was no flash news coverage with a little more monster fightjng the military that seemed to have little effect in its demise. The movie does give you alot of conversation candy with friends….you know like “if that happened to me I would go straight to the harbor and steal a boat to get to the mainland and I would have a shotgun and blast those creatures if they came after me, and I would totally be stocking up at the electronics store I phones Ipods laptops,gun store, Versace store, Gucci store, jewelery store, BMW dealership, furniture store,grocery store and Walmart….damn I’m gonna need a bigger boat!!!….moooo hahahaha

By: THOMAS

THOMAS — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 05:52:46 +0000

GREAT MOVIE I LOVED IT . WASNT A WASTED OF TIME OR MONEY
…I THINK THEY SHOUL DMAKE A COVERFIELD 2.IT WOULD BE AWSOME IF THEY DID.SO THEY SHOULD

By: Tyler

Tyler — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 04:44:26 +0000

I personally think Cloverfield is quite possibly the best movie I have ever seen. The camera point of view really puts you in the movie and makes you feel like you are actually part of it, makes you seem like the monster is right there next to you, explosions are all around you, etc.
For those that complain about not knowing what happened, im SORRY this is a movie that doesnt hand feed you everything like a baby and actually makes you think for once. The movie is ingenious, the reason you dont really find out where its from, or what happened to it, is because it is from the perspective of a regular person living through this event, if you were a regular guy going through this, you would have no idea where this thing came from, what its doing, or whats happening on the other side of town, not knowing whats going on its all just part of the experience and perspective of the movie, and I am glad its that way.
As for a sequel, I dont know if they should make one, I mean of course I want to know more and watch more of the movie, because I loved it so much, but Cloverfield I think is a movie that should just be a one-shot deal, I have a feeling that a sequel would just sort of ruin the original movie, make it loose some of its greatness. But I dont doubt that the directors/producers have the potential to make a sequel, and make it equally as awesome

By: oak

oak — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 03:02:05 +0000

I missed the ending after the credits part, but read about it online.. the movie kinda left me sad and still asking questions because nothing was explained…most people might not like that

I think there must be a paralell storyline or another video found from another group of people that the governement will find that can explain this story in another aspect…because there are so many unanswered questions…

I respect everyone’s point of view, but I don’t think people should view this movie as a conventional movie.. for the most part, it inolved the viewer and felt real.. I do not want to comment the sequel yet ( if there is one ).. It might bring us more answers to …I personally enjoyed CLOVERFIELD

By: Russell

Russell — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 21:59:41 +0000

I think the monster was bred by Aliens, and sent to Earth, to test mankind’s ability to defend itself from a full scale invasion of these creatures, as a prelude to taking over the planet without having to fight themselves. How does that hypotheses sound for a sequel?

By: dan

dan — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 21:45:11 +0000

Ugh dont make a sequel

you’re going all Hollywood Matt!

And fuck those that demanded their money back, so many goddamn ignorant people in this world that need to be hand fed a movie. Pathetic.

By: LEO

LEO — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 19:07:19 +0000

GONZALO I AGREE….WITH U FOR THE MOST PART

By: Gonzalo

Gonzalo — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:55:14 +0000

There has to be a sequel or at least parallel storyline. For one, Lily didn’t die(sorry for spoilers but any critic review of the movie reveals the entire film) thus the original story lives on and most importantly there was no context to the film. It played out like the last 1.5 hours of a 2.5 hour movie, than a stand alone film. I’m all about minimalism in this age of over indulgence and using one’s imagination. But come on I don’t want to use my imagination to explain the entire movie or at least the most important parts. Also the idea of an hour or so worth of extra footage on the upcoming DVD to explain more of the movie seems rather ridiculous. Cloverfield is the type of movie sequels were intended for. I think the last audio bleep in the move after the credits is proof.

By: Tabor

Tabor — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:50:44 +0000

I thought the movie was awesome, and it totally worked for me. As far as I’m concerned within the story of the movie or potential sequel there is no need to know what it is or where it came from. I would just like to see a larger perspective of the event cobbled together from different viewpoints or file footage.