ROTTEN TOMATOES: Cloverfield 2 on the Horizon?

Cloverfield 2 on the Horizon?

Also: Mike Vogel to star as G.I. Joe's Duke?

by Jeff Giles | January 22, 2008

Discuss Article | Blog Article | Email To A Friend

It debuted at number one last weekend, broke the weekend record for a film opening in January, and earned a respectable 77 percent Tomatometer rating from the critics -- so should it surprise anyone that people are already talking about a Cloverfield sequel?

Well, okay, so "people" might technically only refer to Cloverfield director Matt Reeves and his ComingSoon.net interviewer, Max Evry -- but we've talked about rumors founded on less, so let's just run the following quote from Reeves:

"This was so fun 'cause we'd never done anything like it, and I think we'd want to find a similar challenge, to find a way to have its roots in this but be fresh and new, otherwise you're just repeating yourself. There's a moment on the Brooklyn Bridge, and there was a guy filming something on the side of the bridge, and Hud sees him filming and he turns over and he sees the ship that's been capsized and sees the headless Statue of Liberty, and then he turns back and this guy's briefly filming him.

"In my mind that was two movies intersecting for a brief moment, and I thought there was something interesting in the idea that this incident happened and there are so many different points of view, and there are several different movies at least happening that evening and we just saw one piece of another. That idea sort of tickled me. We'll have to see if anyone would want a sequel. If the movie does well and we find a compelling reason to do so then it would be fun to do a sequel."

Showing the events of a movie from another point of view sounds more like the basis for a spinoff television series than a sequel, but hey, we aren't the ones who just rolled up $46 million at the box office, are we?

In other Cloverfield news, IGN Movies is reporting that one of the film's stars, Mike Vogel, is up for the role of Master Sergeant Conrad Hauser -- better known as Duke -- in Stephen Sommers' G.I. Joe adaptation. Until recently, Sam Worthington had been rumored to be the leading contender for the part, but the latest gossip has his shooting schedule for James Cameron's Avatar putting the kibosh on any dreams of Dukehood. From the article:

Vogel's reps at The Gersh Agency refused to confirm or deny the rumor. "We're just not going to comment on that," we were emphatically told. Vogel's agent also failed to respond to our direct e-mail inquiry.

IGN asked Vogel himself today at the Cloverfield press junket in New York City. The actor looked away nervously when pressed and didn't offer either a confirmation or a denial before our interview was abruptly cut off by a studio publicist.

Finally, from the "we remember when a simple Burger King cup was enough for most people" department, Hasbro has announced it has started selling a "highly detailed representation" of the Cloverfield monster via its online shop, for the low, low price of $99.99. If your viewing experience won't be complete until you have a 14-inch, "super-articulated" replica of the beast, click on the last link below!

Source: ComingSoon
Source: IGN Movies
Source: Hasbro

Related Items

Movie:	Avatar
	G.I. Joe
Celeb:	James Cameron
	Stephen Sommers
	Matt Reeves
	Sam Worthington
	Mike Vogel

(1-20 of 26 posts) | Reply

JpPrewitt789 writes:
on Jan 22 2008 05:32 AM

What would the sequel be about? Prequel? More of an origin story more of slusho?

I was reading an interesting review by someone the other day who commented on the style of camera work for the sequel- "Either they do another camcorder-POV and the novelty has worn thin, or they do it regular style and they've ditched what was unique about the original."

It's an interesting point.

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on Jan 22 2008 05:54 AM

How about we find out the monster is actually making a film too (perhaps a documentary on humans), so the sequel is solely from his perspective, with subtitles.

(Reply to this)

walkingdead09 writes:
on Jan 22 2008 07:47 AM

Did you not read that there was another guy filming the whole situation so they think that would the other movie. SO basically you have HUD's POV which was the first movie and the guy filming which would be the second movie.

Jeremy that's a great idea.
I thought the movie was good, I was real surprised.

(Reply to this)

magicman30 writes:
on Jan 22 2008 07:58 AM

While I was sitting there watching the movie I thought it would be a good idea to have this done from different vantage points just so I wouldn't be stuck with these stupid people running towards the monster. I mean there is a giant monster destroying the city. Run Away! But yeah it could be a good idea.

(Reply to this)

Shatter24 writes:
on Jan 22 2008 08:00 AM

Following the guy on the other side of the bridge, filming the whole thing, is a good idea. A different perspective, maybe we can see how the Statute was decapitated. It could work as a television show, that would be kind of neat, or another movie. If it is a sequel, they should split the difference and do 2/3 handheld and 1/3 regular style (for the battling of the military vs. the beast and to explain what was seen in the first movie). A lot of good possibilities here, finally a movie to get people excited.

(Reply to this)

Elixor writes:
on Jan 22 2008 08:14 AM

The movie was good entertainment and well done. I'm nuke warm on a sequel. The point made in the article about intersecting movies is a cool idea, but do we really want to see more of the same incident?

Most of what I liked about the movie was the lack of knowing what's going on and having to try to guess at what's happening. I didn't get caught up in all the viral information, and frankly I don't think that the origins of the creature are that interesting. What made the movie interesting was that it was new and different from most any movie I'd seen before. I don't see how a sequel could be as engrossing and hence become a bore of a movie.

(Reply to this)

jerseycajun writes:
on Jan 22 2008 08:44 AM

JpPrewitt,

Absolutely. I had the same exact thought. There's simply nowhere original left to go.

I think any attempt to make a sequel here is only going to hurt the impression the first is making.

(Reply to this)

wrenchspinner writes:
on Jan 22 2008 09:43 AM

Next time have the monster sneak up the Great Lakes and kick the S**T out of Detroit. I could live with that.

(Reply to this)

opTIMus Nerd writes:
on Jan 22 2008 09:44 AM

Hmm, I have not seen Cloverfield yet but I figure the plot and so forth from spoilers. An interesting sequel might be to use the original story to help critique our ridiculous media in this country. I would like to see a documentary style flick that is made from the perspective of say a post 9/11 documentary featuring news coverage and mis-information and overblown circumstances and replayed footage over and over again so it would approximate how our 24 hour news machine would digest and spew such an event if it really happened. Maybe even highlighting some sort of conspiracy involved, or alleged government involvement...Even tying it to a Presidential election cycle so the fictional mayor of New York can declare himself the "Cloverfield Candidate" that will keep America safe from future alien monster attacks. Introduce an Alien Monster attack threat level indicator...The possibilities are endless!

(Reply to this)

BowieSwimmer writes:
on Jan 22 2008 10:27 AM

I loved the film, it was the best January release. Ever.
But let me also state that I'm very wary about a sequel, and would rather just have the masterful original stand on its own than muddle with it. Because, as someone perfectly stated on here, redoing the hand-held camera would wear the premise a little thin, while a stand filming would strip Cloverfield of its novelty.

I'm all for a sequel if something engaging, original, and just as good as the sequel comes along.
While I like the idea of the other man filming on the Brooklyn Bridge, I think the stories would need to interweave more than that random meeting. Because that is much more spin off material than an actually sequel.
More of the unanswered questions that can't be resolved from the clues online would be great too.

I personally would love to see the film be a legitimate sequel, casting Lily as the main character.
If they decide to go through win the more "spin-off" version, I think following the group of friends Marlena was supposed to be meeting that night [she mentions them a few times] would be superb.

But I'd rather not have a sequel. It would tarnish the first!

(Reply to this)

sauronthegr8 writes:
on Jan 22 2008 11:02 AM

I think if they make a sequel it should be from the military's point of view. Like, the military is documenting what's happening as they go into battle.

I liked the one person point of view. it was very original and intense. But I know a lot of people wanted to see more of the actual monster. This could keep the style of the first one and make for a hell of a movie.

(Reply to this)

thereign writes:
on Jan 22 2008 11:40 AM

"...and we find a compelling reason to do so then it would be fun to do a sequel" = "If we make enough of an obscene amount of money and think we can hook people into the theaters again, then hell's yeah--we'll do a sequel!"

Cloverfield was a very original movie(in its premise, disregarding borrowing its subject format from Blair Witch and about 50 years of Godzilla movies). Doing a sequel is just milking it, plain and simple. There's no reason to go back, because there's no way to make it as original as the first go-round. Hand-held again would not only be boring, it would be annoying. Either shoot it as a standard film with all the action that can be thrown in and characters we can actually CARE ABOUT, or just let the original stand on its own.

Hollywood is always too eager to throw sequels out at us for any film that makes $10 of its budget back. Just let a movie be a damn movie on its own and then move on to something else.

(Reply to this)

MaxFisher14 writes:
on Jan 22 2008 01:20 PM

Cloverfield kicked serious @$$

(Reply to this)

slickfritz781 writes:
on Jan 22 2008 01:33 PM

jeremyd4 writes:
on Jan 22 2008 05:54 AM

"How about we find out the monster is actually making a film too (perhaps a documentary on humans), so the sequel is solely from his perspective, with subtitles."

I laughed

(Reply to this)

jnunez1979 writes:
on Jan 22 2008 02:10 PM

it you want originality, leave it up to pixar to make a sequel...That would be interesting.. Walt Disney Presents' A Pixar Film "COVERFIELD 2". Yeah, I love it!

(Reply to this)

moviethatbeginswithjaws writes:
on Jan 22 2008 02:24 PM

i hope they dont do this
it would be nice to just keep this film original and kick ***
without tacking a crappy sequel to soil cloverfields awesome rep.

well, it would be interesting to see what they came up with
it would also be weird to do another viral marketing campaign

(Reply to this)

MMacKK writes:
on Jan 22 2008 02:51 PM

I'm keen.

Glad to see they are as well.

(Reply to this)

rgallitan writes:
on Jan 22 2008 04:54 PM

Heh - even as the credits rolled, I was thinking about the idea of retelling the evening from a different camcorder. You could easily get 2-3 completely different movies out of the same event. ...It's dangerous waters, to be sure, but I'm not opposed to it.

(Reply to this)

DaHypr1 writes:
on Jan 22 2008 05:21 PM

what if they actually did it from the perspective on the other side of the bridge, and the spanish dude was part of their group? that way they could bring back rob and hud and **** for a cameo....or maybe not haha

(Reply to this)

zoo_estrange writes:
on Jan 22 2008 05:35 PM

Thoughts for the sequal. It actually begins with a QRF (quick reaction force) at the local military base being told of some new equipment they have to use. It's a protoype personel battle cam. It records full high def for a duration of 24 hours. It is used to give commanders real time first hand perspective of what may be happeing. It would need to be small, light and head or helmet mountable. It broadcasts to the command element but also records the person as a back up. It would follow the events as the ordinary Joe's in the military are setting in for another 24 hour period on QRF duty and then the event takes place. At several points the camera wearer sees Hud and the group as they just keep running into them. Eventually the wearer dies and a survivor find the new equipment. It would be a different point of view of the same event but with a cynical average soldiers take on it. He would be more in the middle of the situation and in the action then the previous group because those are his orders.
Just a thought. I'll have the script done in 2 weeks.Feel free to pick it to hell.
Cheers!

(Reply to this)