Cloverfield 2 Will Not Be a “Literal Sequel”

Posted on Saturday, July 26th, 2008 by Adam Quigley

During the Comic Con panel for Fringe, someone asked J.J. Abrams if there were any updates on a Cloverfield sequel. Abrams response started off very much in the same way that it did when he was asked about it before, but then he let slip a piece of information that is sure to spark conjecture amongst fans.

“There’s something we’re playing with now that may or may not happen. There’s an idea we have that plays with… it’s not a literal sequel.“

Unfortunately, that’s where the discussion ended. Abrams is known for being pretty tight-lipped when it comes to his projects, so all we can do is wonder what exactly him and director Matt Reeves (who he confirmed would be directly involved if it happened) have in store for us. Considering that they’re still talking about the sequel this late in the game, and that they’ve already established they wouldn’t want to just re-use the handheld gimmick in the same way they did before, it’s nice to know that they’re not just trying to get a sequel out there based purely on the success of the original. If they do it, it will be because they have a good idea to back it up.

Comments 

 

Related Posts

Tags

Action/Adventure, Comic Conventions, Comic-Con, Sci-Fi, Sequels, , ,

  • kevin
    my guess is that it will be set during the same time as the first, but a different camera POV.

    Or military perspective.
  • Captain Awesome
    Wilford Brimley is the creature.
  • gah
    I "Literally" don't care.
  • I for one look forward to the next incarnation of Cecil the Sea Monster.
  • I would like to see the same story presented in a typical popcorn action movie fashion, and maybe only briefly showing us Rob and others as passing "extras".

    Cloverfield was righteous.
  • adam
    X2. exactly what i was thinking.
  • ALLIK
    I hope its not somethin retarded liek it being form the monsters POV that would surley suck.
  • Jerris Beutler's Day On
    haha, no one cares about this anymore just a few months later. Who'd have guessed?


    Well, besides me.
  • "Considering that they’re still talking about the sequel this late in the game"

    Follow-ups in cinematic franchises (this categorization obviously excludes non-creative torture porn nonsense unworthy of such deeming) typically take a few years to reach the big screen.

    "and that they’ve already established they wouldn’t want to just re-use the handheld gimmick in the same way they did before"

    I know this was written in a rush, but it would be enormously helpful if you mentioned when or where such "establishment" happened to prove that you are not entirely making this up instead of having me do the Google-fetching do the work with your quasi-alluding; it is inartful.

    "it’s nice to know that they’re not just trying to get a sequel out there based purely on the success of the original. If they do it, it will be because they have a good idea to back it up."

    Even more inartful is blanket editorializing, these may be your opinions but they sure as hell are not those of everyone. You should explicitly state that your opinions are, I don't know, yours?
  • I didn't hate the film, but it wasn't something I'd see more than once. The camera idea was cool, glad they're not going to do it again though.
  • Tom
    I thought the film was entertaining enough.
  • JFK
    You mean they're not going to rip the head off the Statue of Liberty again? But that sold tickets the last time.
  • Rory
    I hope its a military perspective, and they bump into the first one's characters...
  • "I know this was written in a rush, but it would be enormously helpful if you mentioned when or where such “establishment” happened to prove that you are not entirely making this up instead of having me do the Google-fetching do the work with your quasi-alluding; it is inartful."

    I apologize. I meant to put the link in...
    http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/04/26/jj-abrams-o...

    "Even more inartful is blanket editorializing, these may be your opinions but they sure as hell are not those of everyone. You should explicitly state that your opinions are, I don’t know, yours?"

    You're not making any sense, sir. The only part of the statement you quoted that was commentary was my calling it "nice." The rest was a response to the attitude J.J. Abrams and Matt Reeves have established toward doing a Cloverfield sequel.
  • Alex.

    Those listed are topics that have been posted in numerous places on numerous ocassions. It should be expected that in order to fully understand a situation, one must do SOME homework.
  • Buggs
    I am not sure why anyone liked this movie. i had a headache in like 0 mins of watching it.
  • Buggs
    I meant 10 min.
  • YoungZe
    I “Literally” share gahs opinion.
  • I'd love to see the perspective of the folks who created and or shepherded the creature to the NY harbor. The military/government perspective is so overused.

    Many of Cloverfield's main imagery stayed with me long after I left the theater. I will be sorry if the handheld, ultra-subjective POV method is jettisoned for part 2...but I will see the second film anyway. For sure.
  • Jerris Beutler's Day On
    Did hey mention if the sequel would carry on the budget and look of a Sci-Fi original movie?
  • Joe
    I would definitely watch a sequel to Cloverfield.

    But then again, I loved Cloverfield and have only seen it once (minus goofing around with my friend's (bootleg from China) DVD.
  • 790
    Buggs, the movie is WAY better on dvd,,,
    I loved the first film, one of the best films of the year, and yeah I did get a little quesy watching it in the theatres, but its not as bad on dvd for some reason, and on dvd you can see alot of things you miss, like the end scene where you see Clover fall into the ocean.

    The sequel should deffinitly be a military perspective, maybe with a news crew riding along like "CNN reporters" in Iraq. They would be usng steady cams, and there would be less movement to deal with.

    The first film made more that it cost x2 so I know the Studiios gonna want another.
  • Voltara
    Maybe in the sequel they can include some real actors, lighting, camera work, script and special effects. If they just rehash the cynical exercise that is Cloverfield #1 it could lead to the public rising as a mob and tearing Manhattan apart by hand with or without the ludicrous monster's assistance
  • Doood
    Maybe to monster will have a camcorder this time.
  • milo
    Maybe they took some tips from LOTR director PJ and have already got the sequel when they filmed the first one. Think about it. The whole "Teddy Hanssen is missing" thing. The Pics from the top secret file. Both found on the Tagrato blog with all the official links. All they need to do is edit, maybe a few extra scenes and bam it's done. I think they're just waiting for some of the hype to die down before starting the new viral......Jus' sayin'.
  • gocitizen
    I'd love a traditional plot/conspiracy/eco terrorist/monster smash film. Cloverfield was a lot of fun and even if you didn't appreciate what they did, you have to applaud the creativity involved with putting it together.

    With all of the creepy options available from the premise, they could make a first rate monster movie. I'd be there.

    Also, for anyone that missed it, you have to hear Michael Giacchino's end credit music - Roar!(Cloverfield Overture). Awesome piece of work.
  • Nick Metrano
    Well when they are crossing the bridge in the first movie Hud breifly makes conntect with a man who is also filming and he films Hud mabey they make another movie from his veiw of the case.
  • maybe
    being that no weapons seemed to have harmed it and it is pretty over the top sci-fi already, cloverfield would have been a good lead into a voltron movie. since voltron was created to fight giant monsters .
  • is...
    one military cam,one civil cam...2 monster...just like that.
  • beto
    i think the sequel would be great. Cloverfield reminds me of games like Half Life. Example: Antlions - Parasites and the first person. and im not sure but in one part a guy hits a parasite with a Crowbar!

    Sorry for my English
  • bill
    ok i saw the movie with my friend and by the time the movie ended, we could not walk straight. thats how dizzy it made us. i really hope they dont do another handheld camera thing in the sequel like they did in the first one.
  • SoldierOfFortune
    I've been a Cloverfield nut since I first saw the trailer. Since then, I've browsed the Wed quite a bit and have heard various rumors about new plotlines. Still, I think the sequel should be done in the same style as the previous one but perhaps in a new local. Europe would be cool, (Britain or France) or maybe Asia (Shanghai or Tokyo).
  • Matt H
    In my view, Abrams set this up to be a trilogy:

    1st movie--POV collateral damage (the random and innocent victims) w/ little info on what's actually causing this
    2nd Movie--POV US Military and a lot more info on what's actually causing this
    3rd Movie--POV Government (full cinematic style) and the ultimate reveal behind all of this.

    All movies cover the same general time period with each successor going a few hours in time past it's predecessor.

    Just my thoughts, and if it were done that's how I'd like to see it.
  • adam v
    GUH - if you dont care why bother going to the effort of reading the article then commenting you idiot haters like you drive me nuts get a life.
  • goobeedeeglop
    i loved cloverfield
  • Shari B
    Loved the first one. Bought the DVD. The theater gave me a headache but on our 32 inch tv I had no problem and seemed to give the illusion of less movement and we could tell more of what was actually going on. Can't wait for a sequel. Like the idea of the brother not really being dead, just fell in the river. Also military finding the 2 in Central Park severely hurt but alive. And if Clover is just a baby then let's see mama. Kind of reminds me of the old film I loved as a kid 'Gorgo".
  • Mike
    For those that said this movie gave you a headache or dizzy, you have issues. I saw the movie with my wife, who is extremely sensitive to motion sickness, and she had no issue with it at all. In fact, most of the people I spoke to say dizziness or becoming sick wasn't an issue at all.

    That said, I really hope they make a sequel. The first one was one of the best movies I've seen in a long time.
  • 790
    I might have issues Mike, but there not from Cloverfield. Lol.
  • billy
    i really liked this movie i think they should do the same way of shooting from like a news reporter or army guy but i would watch it during the same setting but i would like to see it after new york been destroyed and it moves to somewhere else or whatever but i want to see a sequel
  • ben
    its chuck norris for christ sake
  • Brian
    My Fiance' and I are feeling the same way as alot of others are saying. We should have it filmed in the eyes of the military, so we can go in depth into what the military can see as to where it comes from, and also if it died or not. Like a helmet cam off of one of the troops, who lives of course, but he would be in a helicopter in the air when the bombing raids happen at the end. At the end of the credits you can hear them saying its still alive, so the sequel could probably be a continuation of the original, and have it be from the military too.
  • KingOfPain
    There is only one guy who can kill that Cloverfield beast and his name is Stephen Siegel...Lol I can see him just killing the damn thing with a karate chop or one of his famous neck snapz. I love this movie
  • The Kaleb
    I agree with Kevin.
    I think I heard something about Cloverfield 2 being the same attack, but from another point of view.
  • King of the Rodeo
    I agree with milo and 790.
    this film was great if Abrams does make a second they're gonna wait for the hype of "C2" to die down then release a few teaser trailers like the first
  • ROFL CoLVERFEILD ROCCS SO MUCH I WANT TO GO OUT AND SEE IT AGEN BUT ITS OVERPRISED AND IME PORE AS HELL AND MY MOM WOENT LET ME SEE IT AGEN ='( PLESE dONTATE TO ME!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • asshole
    that was literally the stupidest fucking wanna-be horror movie ever made
  • Flyboy
    a good sequel would start off where the last movie ended so im thinking a POV from a millitary video journalist like it starts out with seeing a squad makeing its way throgh central park and they come across that bridge rob and beth were under and you see robs dead body looking like he was trying to pull beth out but couldent do it thats a good way to tie back into the orginal story but keep it seprate. the squad could just be a clean up crew after hammer down (killing parasites and helping survivors)
    but of course mama clover and dada clover arn't happy to see their babys missing and thats when trouble starts now theres two monsters to deal with


    P.S. sorry if theres spelling errors im only 14
  • eric cartman
    so i have heard rumors like the sequel will be the same attack from a different perspective like the military or from a iphone or handycam. these would be cool but i would just like to really see more of those monsters and attack a new city.and if they are going to do it just from another perspective, it really needs to explain lots of new stuff about the attack.
blog comments powered by Disqus
gorilla nation

/Film

Copyright © 2009 /Film. Web design by Pro Blog Design. Logo Concept by: Illumination Ink

All names, trademarks and images are copyright their respective owners.