You're fighting the good fight, as always Duckroll, but I'm afraid that the marketing has them now.
*takes draw on cigarette*
Poor bastards.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Trailer for "10 Cloverfield Lane" (aka Cloverfield 2) airs before 13 Hours
- Thread starter Sweeney Tom
- Start date
- Status
You're fighting the good fight, as always Duckroll, but I'm afraid that the marketing has them now.
*takes draw on cigarette*
Poor bastards.
I'd wager it's been a Cloverfield project at least since they started filming. Since it started being talked about it's been considered a top secret Bad Robot project. Would be odd to phrase it as that if it was just an average indie movie.
What exactly does this mean? Any chance you could drop the cynicism in favor of fun, or is that just too much to ask?
AHA-Lambda
Member
Oooh, k, fair enough then
All Bad Robot projects are "top secret" projects. It's a production house run by geeks for geeks, and they don't do "normal" films.
Darth Pinche
Member
Amazing! Maybe this is the story about how the footage from the first film is found. Thus "Cloverfield"
Great.
Godzilla 2014 was awful so this doesn't say much, though.
Can't remember it very well but doesn't it take ages until you see the monsters? Thought is was very, very boring.
Godzilla 2014 was awful so this doesn't say much, though.
Can't remember it very well but doesn't it take ages until you see the monsters? Thought is was very, very boring.
And your point? Why does it matter when the exact point this became a Cloverfield project?
My point is that it being labeled as a Bad Robot project with a degree of secrecy does not indicate it was intended to be a Cloverfield film when they were shooting it. It might have been, it might not have been. It's a sci-fi themed thriller which was going to have some twist either way, so they would be keeping it under wraps, like with all their films.
Messypandas
Member
The whole thing reminded me tonally of the Lost season 2 intro. Not sure what to expect, hype in check.
They might have intended to eventually tie it into the Cloverfield 'brand' but this started life as a film called Valencia that had zero connection to the Matt Reeves other than it being produced by Abrams' Bad Robot.
This is a marketing move and nothing more. When it was called Valencia no one cared. Now it has Cloverfield in the title it's gaining momentum. Kudos to Paramount's marketing department. I'm not saying that this won't be a good film but a change of title isn't going to change things either way.
And I don't know where you got 'indie' movie from, this was always a studio film.
*chortle*
You really like marketing don't you, son?
Right, but even if it became a Cloverfield project sometime after, why does it matter? It's a Cloverfield movie now and people are excited about that aspect.
Alright, obviously I missed some conference where it was determined that building up hype for a movie with any sort of marketing is considered a vital sin. Sorry guys.
> The main character in Steven Spielberg's War of the Worlds is Ray.
> JJ Abrams directed Super 8, a film inspired by early Spielberg films.
> The main character in JJ Abram's The Force Awakens is Rey.
#ItsAllConnected
I'm confused. You asked the question of why no one "picked up on this" since the lead actress was giving interviews about the film since a while back. I was answering that question. If it doesn't matter why did you ask?
I didn't ask a question, but thanks.
???????????
You wondered about it, I took the time to explain it. Now you're trying to be a smartass about it?
RumblingRosco
Member
Cloverfield is one of the greatest romance movies of our time. I hope this "Cloverfield 2" maintains that theme.
Dude, seriously chill out. I'm allowed to wonder without asking questions, it's like 10 pages into the reveal thread FFS. I wasn't trying to pinpoint the exact location in this movie's marketing that it became a Cloverfield project and start a vendetta against viral/secret project marketing.
The only question I asked is what the point of grumbling about all of this is to you, which you still haven't really answered.
And I'd appreciate it if you didn't call me a smartass, especially with you whipping out a "*cough*" in your first post on the matter. We can be quippy here without getting hostile.
Triggerhappytel
Member
I think they're saying you should keep your hype in check if you're expecting it to be a monster movie like the first one. This is more than likely a study of the human element in the fallout of a disaster such as that seen in Cloverfield.
I think they only show up at the end, when the two protagonists realise they're not hostile and they're not monsters at all. It's the military action against the creatures which
causes everyone including the protagonists to die
RepairmanJack
Member
A puzzle piece being designed for a certain puzzle and a piece being forced into a puzzle afterward are two different things. Sure it can still be good, but hopefully the points at which they force it into a Cloverfield movie aren't so apparent.
I don't understand your point. You wondered aloud in a discussion thread about a valid point (if they were making a Cloverfield sequel, why didn't anyone figure it out until now?). Are you suggesting that it is not welcome for someone who wants to share information to answer that question? I'm chill, but I'm offended that after spending effort to reach out and try and answer the question, you jump at me asking why it matters. It doesn't matter. I'm not "grumbling", I'm just literally explaining that the reason why no one picked up on it is probably because when they were making the film there was no indication that it had anything to do with Cloverfield. Why are you mad at me?
I mean, sorry to all if I seemed over hyped, that genuinely wasn't my intention.
I'd agree not to get overhyped with anything, but saying that "oh look, it's just marketing, best not get excited" is kinda silly and deflating.
First off, I'm not mad at you and I apologize if it ever seemed that way. I enjoying banter as much as the next guy and I think it's pretty obvious that you do to.
My primary source of wonder (which sounds super pretentious at this point) was merely wondering why no one I knew had even mentioned for a second that "Hey look at this movie, wonder if this is at all Cloverfield related." I had a large pool of friends who were all over the Cloverfield ARG, so that surprised me, and I wondered why in that post.
You answered the question in a weird way, though, source of wonderment aside. It just seemed like you were intent on burning the marketing and extinguishing all hype and summing it up to "oh, well, it's marketing so don't get too excited about it." In a reveal thread where people are getting excited and starting new rumblings of secrets and ARG hunts I felt that begged the question of why. I appreciate you taking the time to explain it, honestly, as I appreciate anyone who takes the time to reach out to me. But I felt it earned a response and here we are.
Haloid1177
Banned
My friend texted me at 1 AM last night about this and we both just flipped out. Can't believe after all this time we're getting a sequel.
Deft Beck
Member
We're right under its feet, Ray!
I just can't buy Tom Cruise under any sort of threat. There's no immersion when he stars in any sort of action movie besides the MI series.
Triggerhappytel
Member
I wonder if it's worth putting this stuff in the OP, just to set people's expectations in check. According to IMDb Cloverfield's budget was $25 million, so if this really is a $5 million production then there's no way it's going to be on the scale of the first movie. It might have a few flashes of monsters, but they're certainly not going to be the focus.
I'm going to blame Busty for this, because that tone bleeds over.
I guess I explained it the way I did because earlier in the thread I already did my fill of discussion on it. It's a fast moving thread though, so obviously people aren't going to see everything. I'm definitely not telling people to NOT be excited just because this -could- be a marketing stunt. I mean, the fact that Abrams and Paramount are willing to use the Cloverfield name again is a good sign for fans because even if it IS a marketing stunt, it means there is renewed interest in the property.
What I have wondered myself previously in the thread though, is what expectations fans have now regarding this, and whether it could backfire on them. There is a good chance that there could be no monsters or anything in it, and it's another type of weird quirky scifi thriller with some sort of loose connection to Cloverfield. If that's the case, it would have been easy to hide because nothing even in the production of the film would indicate that they're doing another Cloverfield movie.
On the other hand, there's also a chance that they have since expanded on the movie in post-production, and the budget could be more than 5 million now. It'll certainly be interesting to see how this pans out, and marketing or not, I am pretty excited to see how it plays out.
I'm going to blame Busty for this, because that tone bleeds over.
I guess I explained it the way I did because earlier in the thread I already did my fill of discussion on it. It's a fast moving thread though, so obviously people aren't going to see everything. I'm definitely not telling people to NOT be excited just because this -could- be a marketing stunt. I mean, the fact that Abrams and Paramount are willing to use the Cloverfield name again is a good sign for fans because even if it IS a marketing stunt, it means there is renewed interest in the property.
What I have wondered myself previously in the thread though, is what expectations fans have now regarding this, and whether it could backfire on them. There is a good chance that there could be no monsters or anything in it, and it's another type of weird quirky scifi thriller with some sort of loose connection to Cloverfield. If that's the case, it would have been easy to hide because nothing even in the production of the film would indicate that they're doing another Cloverfield movie.
On the other hand, there's also a chance that they have since expanded on the movie in post-production, and the budget could be more than 5 million now. It'll certainly be interesting to see how this pans out, and marketing or not, I am pretty excited to see how it plays out.
I would completely agree with that, yeah. Getting swept up in the Cloverfield ARG last time, the sting of "we hyped this up for months and... it's nothing" is terribly familiar. I do hope that there's more to it than the 5 million, but I honestly wouldn't be disappointed if their wasn't. Mary Winstead and John Goodman are two of my favorites working actors and the plot seems fresh. Having Cloverfield attached to it is just icing on the cake.
Again, sorry if my tone seemed hostile. My hope for this movie definitely clouds all negativity, which could bite me in the ass.
The production list does mention
"an abandoned rural highway and gas station, a burning Chicago city skyline, a beat-up yellow truck, and destroyed car."
infinit777
Member
YES! this is going to be the best 2016 ever!
Wonder if Giacchino will be back for some more out-of-nowhere credits music.
I'm going to blame Busty for this, because that tone bleeds over.
To be clear....,
To be perfectly clear...,
-- this is probably an accurate statement.
Agreed. This could be a fantastic film, genuinely. But given that this is from the studio that gave us a found footage film that directed the audience to a fucking website rather than wrap up the story itself (The Devil Inside) my Spidey senses go mad whenever I think Paramount is (once again) trying to pull a fast one.
In my efforts to try and temper people's expectations I may have come across as more "get off my lawn" rather than "this probably isn't the monster fest you're looking for" but I'm sure we'll see, either way soon enough.
Look Busty, Paramount is the only studio crazy enough to keep paying Michael Bay more and more money to make stupid giant robot live action films with huge escalating budgets even though GAF hates each one more than the last. I just can't hate them.
True. They did give us the Jackass films which I love so much I even love all the deleted scenes they slapped together to make the 'point five' films.
schlongdog
Banned
Do people honestly think they'd have the line 'somethings coming' before flashing the Cloverfield name and then not have a monster in the film?
The monster needs to be the torso of TJ Miller.
I think finding out if it's related to Cloverfield 1 at all is part of the mystery, but I have a feeling they will explain that before its release. My hunch is that they're trying to branch it off into a whole IP, where the only requirement is it's a scifi thriller and the title incorporate Cloverfield in some way.
Like Black Mirror.
I think finding out if it's related to Cloverfield 1 at all is part of the mystery, but I have a feeling they will explain that before its release. My hunch is that they're trying to branch it off into a whole IP, where the only requirement is it's a scifi thriller and the title incorporate Cloverfield in some way.
Like Black Mirror.
Haloid1177
Banned
Jim from The Newsroom.
captjohnboyd
Member
I was pretty underwhelmed with Cloverfield, although was entertaining enough in the theater, but this movie looks amazing to me.
It's actually the fact that it started out separate from Cloverfield that has me SO excited.
I'm all in or sci fi pretty much full stop no matter the quality but it's the human under stress character study of this that's really intriguing to me. Hopefully the Cloverfield angle isn't too shoehorned in. Perhaps if there was already some crazy twist in the end it won't be too much of a stretch to just change the aliens around a little and BAM! Cloverfield.
Goodman playing a "potential" psychopath and Winstead and Gallagher getting some gigs is always a plus as well. It really looks like Goodman is a proper nutjob in that teaser as well. The scene with the barrel....would it be too far out there to suggest it looks like he's threatening them with burning off some body parts in acid if they don't comply? I'd be willing to bet he goes full on dangerous in this and that's always best Goodman.
Regardless I'll be day one for this.
Edit: Yeh that poster sums it up. This movie is going to show Goodman in all his crazy fury
It's actually the fact that it started out separate from Cloverfield that has me SO excited.
I'm all in or sci fi pretty much full stop no matter the quality but it's the human under stress character study of this that's really intriguing to me. Hopefully the Cloverfield angle isn't too shoehorned in. Perhaps if there was already some crazy twist in the end it won't be too much of a stretch to just change the aliens around a little and BAM! Cloverfield.
Goodman playing a "potential" psychopath and Winstead and Gallagher getting some gigs is always a plus as well. It really looks like Goodman is a proper nutjob in that teaser as well. The scene with the barrel....would it be too far out there to suggest it looks like he's threatening them with burning off some body parts in acid if they don't comply? I'd be willing to bet he goes full on dangerous in this and that's always best Goodman.
Regardless I'll be day one for this.
Edit: Yeh that poster sums it up. This movie is going to show Goodman in all his crazy fury
SictorVullivan
Member
Full poster:
Same green sky as the first movie's poster.
"Monsters"
Same green sky as the first movie's poster.
"Monsters"
Both the monster and John Goodman's character?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked