Comments on: Cloverfield 2 – Cloverfield Sequel

By: Norton Mansfield

Norton Mansfield — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 03:32:39 +0000

I think it would be cool if there was a second Cloverfield monster with a Handycam, filming the first Cloverfield monster, the first extraterrestrial home video.

By: Brimstone

Brimstone — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 21:31:23 +0000

I believe that Cloverfield is a project named by the government and so not giving a direct name to the monster they just simply call it Cloverfield.
However i believe that not giving the type of species the monster is is absolute genius i also would like to say that this is something for movie history. And for those that say Godzilla should return are not very bright to even think that he’s been retired for a good long time. Why recreate a past just to please a group of audience for their money worths even though that J.J. did pointed out this monster we see in our generation is the newest of the family. Bringing Godzilla into Cloverfield’s project will not be a big crowd pleaser in my opinion. Rates of the movie would go down and because of you people wanting Godzilla J.J. would say fuck you for brainwashing me into making a bastardized idea i fell into for fans sakes of keeping a dead legacy alive. J.J. wants to create a new monster and which he did not only just the monster but a scenerio, a partial view of who this creature is and now slowly understanding where he came from.
For Cloverfield 2 i’m only saying to a sugguestion. Maybe a military view and few more views from other citizens in NYC. Link them together later on in life and have a reminder that the military has now seen the face of the project coming alive. You know how the government would go to a UFO crash without hesitation well maybe theres an idea except the monster was still alive and the military couldnt contain the beast much longer.

By: Josh Warner

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 01:32:46 +0000

monster versus monster…..nuff said

By: Chelsea

Chelsea — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 03:33:13 +0000

Oh and, when I saw the pic of the monster…O_O wow, that is pretty scary XD freaked me out enough

By: Chelsea

Chelsea — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 03:30:59 +0000

Show the monsters face this time in the movie!! XD you must! Pleeeeaaaaase! hahahahaha I sort of disagree whit what most of the people are saying about how the camera moved….I really liked it, it was kind of a unique feel to it and it kept me watching the move (as well as what was happening, the camera just added to the drama and action). Can’t wait for a sequel!! ^o^

By: Frank

Frank — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:37:34 +0000

Just to set things straight on the shaky cam. In film school one of the first things I learned back in the 90’s was shaky cam is an industry “no-no”. So when I see this, even though I think it can be used brilliantly like in Cloverfield, it gets me mad knowing I was told by professors this is poorly constructed cinema. I truly wonder what is being taught this days now this form is being used more often in films. Enough on that. CF2 needs to have more of a military presence in the film than the first one. People in the theater were basically jumping up and down when our jets and armor were attacking the creature rooting for them to kill it. I can’t recall another recent film where I’ve experienced the audience get into it as much as they did with CF. All that tells me is that J.J. accomplished what he was trying to do.

By: Joe

Joe — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 15:30:16 +0000

Well, i really loved the movie with the fact that, you have no idea what is happening and why. And for once, you get to see the fighting against the National guard and Clover. But i think that the shaky camera thing is okay. But this time, the main character should be a soldier who is following clover. Not a god damn love story, but in a way a war movie. What the government is doing against clover and what happens after Hammer Down. And maybe a part where they are evacuating and have the parasites attacking people. But i say there should be more fighting, like Apaches and cobras. And maybe an Osprey evacuating people.

By: Tyler

Tyler — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:04:23 +0000

I think a 2nd movie is a great idea. but the one thing i don’t like is that most people complain about the director using a handy camera instead of a film camera. well what i mean is, he uses a film camera but he shakes it in the movie to either make u feel like your the person holding the non expensive camera (Wal-Mart camera) or he uses that idea to make feel like your watching a film on a disaster, that happened in New york city, and someone just happened to be holding a camera. i love this idea of the shaky cam. i what to go to film school and become a director and if i ever do a movie like this, i would use the shaky camera idea. oh and everyone can stop complain about the shaky camera. you all sound like a bunch of 2 year olds just deal with it.

By: CrypticSparks

CrypticSparks — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:04:59 +0000

I did think that the shakiness was a bit much, but I loved the movie. I’ve watched it several times, and I’d gladly watch the sequel. I haven’t read through all the comments, but if you watched the Special Features on the DVD with the making of the film or something, it says that Clover(that’s what they refer to the monster as) is only a baby and was frightened when the oil rig exploded or whatever happened and attacked Manhattan. I think there could possibly be a parent, seeing as it said in the Special Features that Clover was just a hatchling. That would amount to one bigass, angry mom or dad. I think it would be amusing to see just how much damage that one could cause.

I liked the ending of Cloverfield because it made it so you could have been open to different ideas. Rob and Beth could have survived, the monster could be dead, or Rob and Beth could be dead, the monster dead too, or the monster alive and the two dead or alive. Monster might’ve moved on from Manhattan and destroyed some other major city, or it could’ve overwhelmed the military and went back to the ocean after it was too tired. It could have been pursued by the military back into the ocean. Etc. I’m rambling now.

But the whole point is that a Cloverfield 2 would be kickass awesome and I hope they do come out with a sequel.

By: Lou (Ducky) DeFino

Lou (Ducky) DeFino — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:44:21 +0000

Cloverfield was one of the most realistic films I’ve seen in quite sometime.
Granted this is old news now, but when I first saw it I was truly blown away. Being a huge fan of film I didn’t really know what to expect. I’m old school. Not a fan of computer graphics in many films (I feel it ruins the quality of “believing” in the film at times) so I was quite impressed with the visuals as well as the acting. As far as comments about the camera being too shaky I disagree completely. If this film didn’t have that “point of view” look and was filmed as a normal movie I don’t think it would have made the impact it did. The one thing that many movies lack today is imagination. “Everything” has to be shown in complete detail making it “easier” for the brain dead movie viewers “to get it”. Sad but true.
I think “Cloverfield” is a classic. And I’ll tell you this. I’m sure it pissed the Japanese off big time… LoL! We made the BEST “godzilla” film ever!
Really looking forward to the Cloverfield movie sequel.