Total Film recently caught up with Matt Reeves, who gave us an update on the status of Cloverfield 2, saying, "getting the right idea together has been taking a long time."
I think the most simplest route to go, if you want the handycam thing again, is somewhat easy. You can do it like Qurentine where you are following a reporter. Thus the person WANTS to get closer to the monster and gives the story more chances to show off things. The reporter can even be following a soldier group or something, giving it yet another aspect.
Another route you can take is the people in the first film were not the only people with a camera and it wasnt the only footage found by the government. Thus we can follow new people in new scenerios. The only issue here is its basically the same thing, just a new perspective.
However if they go with the standard film route the ideas are endless. The only issue here is well the handheld thing is what made Cloverfield awesome.
I think for the longest there the rumor was that the sequel would follow the military in the situation. Having it as a reporter following the group could allow for the handycam thing, but allow for more professional shooting as well. Of course if they go that route, they have to be somewhat careful or else it would really feel a whole lot like Battle: Los Angeles to me.
I can see it, but can't see it. how exactly would it be like Battle LA other than monsters in our own city type of deal?
I think the best idea of it would to either make the cameraman professional like you said, thus more steady, or make it semi handheld. Meaning when the person (i wanna say she so bad) starts reporting they cut to that camera, then when she stops it cuts away. Of course to make it realistic those cameras do not last that long without being plugged in. So they can't have it running non stop like the first film. Then again Qurentine got away with it.
Looking at the strengths of the first film. They need to go into an enclosed space again, like the Subway. They need to "fight" the monster a lot more. And they need to show the army a ton more. That one scene with the soldiers rushing down the street is by far one of my all time favorite scenes in any movie.
And if they do follow the soldiers, they need to keep the soldiers "away" from the main character. They should only allow the viewers to connect with one or two soldiers, so the realistic "hey our army is kicking ass" feeling sticks.
The way it would be similar is cause it's kind of the same thing. I mean, if it follows the military, as in has a reporter that pretty much becomes another member of the squad, so you're following this one squad around. This is the same thing that Battle: LA does. Then of course you have them fighting the monster, focusing on this military squad doing it. The "handycam" aspect of it causing the movie to be tighter with the squad and providing a grittier style, exactly like how Battle: LA felt. I don't know. Just the minute I thought of "reporter with a camera, following a military unit", Battle: LA was the first thing that came to mind. And in a not-so-general sense, it's the same premise. Just Battle: LA didn't exactly do a handycam movie. Though the tight shooting of it and shaky cam effects throughout did give the same tight/gritty feel that such films do.
I remember when that rumor started going around, and I'm sure it's one of the ideas they are still kicking around. I like the idea of that one, because it would ensure that the audience got some of the answers they've been wanting. I'm starting to dig that Reporter idea though, because it would give a plausible reason for someone to keep the cameras rolling. My only hope though is that it doesn't take place at the same time. Let's set it for the next day or a little bit further down, where the monster has been rampaging for a while and people are getting more and more desperate. Then it's not the same type of 'chase' or 'race' movie like the first one, but has a different feel to it.
You could set it right after when the bomb went off. but then do you move it to another city? By that time the monster has no food, the little ones dont have food, and the city should be pretty much destroyed.
The only issue is with the monster I dont see a TON of potential with it unless they develop it a little further. Is it still just pissed off and destroying crap or does it have a purpose? And will it do anything beyond swing its arms and destroy buildings? That was cool the first time, time to think of something new.
Also wasn't it a tenticle that destroyed the bridge? The monster had no tenticles....
And lets leave the CGI people from Battle LA out of it since they think they should be involved with the story lol....last thing i want is cloverfield to turn into a robot and all we get is a bunch of explosions with no point to the story....
See Soldier, that's why I say they need to take it away from the handheld style. By expanding the scope you'd be able to answer those questions about the monster (why it's doing what it's doing, how it's operating, etc) while being able to expand on the action past waving his arms around and smashing buildings.
I think you could keep the handy-cam style and still get those answers. If you put the camera in the hands of a reporter, it's only natural that the reporter would be seeking out answers and pose inquiries and such that would allow a way for them to provide all the answers needed.
The only problem with the reporter idea is who exactly would they ask to get those answers. The army is clearly busy dealing with the situation and definitely wouldn't be willing to speak with the press about it, and pushing even further would only stretch the suspension of disbelief. Not saying that it couldn't work, but personally, I'd prefer a wider angle.
I loved the handheld style of Cloverfield, but I don't think that's the only thing that made it awesome. I could see them having success with a tight-perspective on the characters without having someone holding the camera through it all. It would be interesting to see this movie on a broader scale that could cover the entire country as opposed to the one incident. It would be very different, but could be just as epic.
I'm surprised it isn't next in line after how Let Me In performed at the box office.
Yeah, that's a very good point. I'm not even sure what he has lined up next either. I was hoping that after his last film "Let Me In" he'd movie on into this sequel.
As big as this was, and as many fans of it are out there, I'm really surprised they aren't working harder to make this happen. Maybe they are just really opposed to the ideas of sequels and want to do more original works, but as interested as they seem in a sequel I don't know why it's not happening.
I really hope to see this one day...soon, preferably!
FilmWatch is a community of awesome people posting and discussing the latest movie news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.