Comments on: Cloverfield 2 Writer

By: BB

BB — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 01:28:26 +0000

FUCK u guys that say the shaky camera is a bad idea thats what makes it awesome and we only know as much as their finding out which is perty f-ing cool too

By: Rinny

Rinny — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 16:59:37 +0000

I had to watch the movie a second time to understand the exploding part. When they walk in that area where people are being treated, you notice that there’s a guy with a gaping hole in his stomach and someone says “That was a bite”. I guess the bite does something to make your guts explode. Gross. I’d love to see a sequel, but I want it from the government’s perspective. I want to see the aftermath. Not another run-around with a camera. It wouldn’t seem believable a second time.

By: ktox

ktox — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:02:46 +0000

WHATEVER!!!
I just saw the novie and was kinda like… WTF???? I liked it tho… but it didnt really have anything original… I mean, monster attacking and destroying New York; DONE! footage from a camcorder; DONE! I really liked the subway scene, when the “spider” things attacked them, but didnt understand what happened to the girl that was bitten, DID SHE EXPLODE???
I’d like a sequel that explains all these things, and that shows different poits of views, but no more shaky camera!!!

By: D.C.

D.C. — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 02:54:04 +0000

I like the idea of a mockumentary. Like Spinal Tap, only about the monster, lol! No, really, but I like the CNN idea — they could splice together bits of news stuff and people’s vid cams, all “telling the story” in a non-linear fashion and answering questions in a revealing way…but without being super-sledgehammery. That was one thing I loved about Cloverfield (and one of the Lost influences –YES I know JJ Abrams didn’t write it, but Drew did, and he’s a big Lost person, so to speak, and works a lot with Abrams — and to say a producer does not influence a film in any way artistically is a little harsh, BTW)…that is to say, the way the film reveals things on a need to know, casual basis. If you’re someone who needs to have things spelled out in a super-expositional manner, I’m thinkin’ Drew Goddard and other dogma style filmmakers are probably not the ones to look to…

By: horse licker

horse licker — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 00:59:25 +0000

i think that in the sequel they should show the mosters big hairy dick and pubic sack…he should t-bag the white house while hes at it

By: big fat bill

big fat bill — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 00:57:06 +0000

i personally thought cloverdick was great…although ive heard rumblins that the sequel may be the same attack from a different camcorder… that doesnt sound like a great idea, especially showing the same attack again. just hope they dont screw it up

By: bunnyhero

bunnyhero — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 01:44:58 +0000

i would totally see a sequel. but no more shakycam please.

By: Thos

Thos — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 19:39:00 +0000

I’m up for a sequel that is a “real” movie done from the military/government perspective. Same story, different angle. I enjoyed Cloverfield, but got no closure. They need to do another one to at least explain what the hell is going on.

By: NYCKING87

NYCKING87 — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 19:29:41 +0000

HELL YEAH I WANT ANOTHER ONE. BUT THE SEQUEL SHOULD BE SHOT LIKE A MOVIE IS SHOT NORMALLY, NOT WITH A SHAKY CAM. MORE BACKGROUND INFO ON THE MONSTER WOULD BE NICE TOO. IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE WHERE THIS THING CAME FROM, OR IF IT WAS UNDER THE OCEAN FROM THE GET GO.

By: Lars

Lars — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 10:11:25 +0000

I like the idea of a sequel, because there are many open questions in the first movie. As for new concept: They could show the events from a different perspective (e.g. CNN like news show).