Why did JJ allow "COVERFIELD" in TITLE as it had NADA to do w/original ?
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — 10 Cloverfield Lane
badjesus — 9 years ago(July 11, 2016 04:00 PM)
The trailer even semi-alludes to the "creature" from original possibly the cause of the devastation outside and of John Goodman hiding out in the bunker. Not only that but the audience has to sit through near an HOUR before we get to any scenes outside the bunker. The film was simply.boring. Unfortunate too as the acting was great. Goodman as always amazing.
-
Bruce7 — 9 years ago(October 27, 2016 02:13 PM)
"God Particle" It is the third entry in the Cloverfield anthological film series.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_Particle_(film)
Can you fly this plane?
Surely u cant be serious
I am serious,and dont call me Shirley -
transmentalist — 9 years ago(July 21, 2016 11:16 AM)
I think or at least hope there may be more to "Cloverfield" franchising than "monster."
I could see each film featuring old timey monsters (kaiju, aliens, etc.) but following an entirely independent cinematic conceit (found footage, psychological thriller, etc.) to portray a human character arc (finally admitting mutual love, learning to overcome a tendency to run away, etc.)
The monster element could be universal, but incidental in other words -
MarwoodWalks — 9 years ago(July 22, 2016 02:03 AM)
The two films exist in the same universe, but are not prequels or sequels. They are stories told about the same event, which is the alien invasion of earth, but that's the only link between them.
Just google some interviews with JJ Abrams about it, he calls the 2 films 'blood relations' in a few and 'sisters' in others.
http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/10-cloverfield-lane-how-j-j-abrams-made-a-secret-sequel-20160309
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence." -
pelagius-14590 — 9 years ago(September 28, 2016 05:57 PM)
Back in 2008-2011 or so, JJ Abrams was always asked about Cloverfield 2 and he used to say that they were waiting to do something very different for the 2nd movie. He said one idea was to show the same event from different people's point of view.
10 Cloverfield Lane is probably exactly what he said back then, even though they arent during the same monster attack from Cloverfield.
I think the Cloverfield monster was just a large monster the aliens used to wipe out large cities just like how they used a small, predator type in 10 Cloverfield lane, in order to hunt and kill survivors.
John Goodman's character explained that an alien attack would do that in phases. -
MarwoodWalks — 9 years ago(July 22, 2016 01:55 AM)
Logic doesn't say that.
- Both films produced by the same person
- Both films have the word 'cloverfield' in the title
- Both films feature alien monsters.
You think its illogical to think there is a link between the films?
really?
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."
-
mugojoe — 9 years ago(July 22, 2016 06:57 AM)
Interestingly enough, based on your list you can say that "Star Trek" and "Star Wars" are in the same universe. Just swap out "Cloverfield" with the word "Star." That's a pretty tenuous rationale you got there, sweetheart.
So without further information, it's logical.
After observations it's more logical to conclude that the filmmaker made an error in titling the film with the brand name, "Cloverfield."
Looking at it another way: If this film didn't include "Cloverfield" in the title and didn't include minor references to the first movie (e.g. "Slusho" neon sign), can you create a list of themes, characters, or designs that would lead an ordinary viewer to irrefutably make an overwhelming connection between the two films? -
MarwoodWalks — 9 years ago(July 22, 2016 09:15 AM)
Sweetheart? You wanker. Why can't people on IMDB keep discussions civil? Well I don't start the name calling, but I am fine to go with it as you have taken us there, sweetturd.
based on your list you can say that "Star Trek" and "Star Wars" are in the same universe
no doofus, Cloverfield is a name a bit more specific and unique than 'star'. My list was specific to the link between these 2 films and not something to expand to all films ever.
JJ
DOES
link the 2 films. They are tales set in the same 'universe' where they earth is invaded by the same alien monsters. Not sure why you would argue with this, as its very well documented that the films
ARE
linked. The links are obvious to anyone who has seen both films. The giant space monsters attacking the planet in both films should be quite a big clue.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2016/mar/15/why-10-cloverfield-lanes-success-proves-the-enduring-power-of-surprise
Many assumed it would be a direct sequel to Cloverfield, but its been referred to as more of a blood relative. Abrams has cleverly manufactured a franchise of secretive sci-fi thrillers that exist under one mysterious word and provide an antithesis to the tired cycle of uninspired sequels that are trotted out every month.
One thing that the films low-budget success will definitely lead to is yet more Cloverfields. Abrams and director Dan Trachtenberg have discussed the potential for sequels, and the ending certainly hints at more to come. But after breaking the template this time around, can it be done again? And after all, would a surprise Cloverfield semi-sequel really be a surprise next time?
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence." -
mugojoe — 9 years ago(July 22, 2016 09:22 PM)
So when I challenge, "can you create a list of themes, characters, or designs that would lead an ordinary viewer to irrefutably make an overwhelming connection between the two films?" your answer is
"I can't. But here's some well-known documentation showing that the person who's cashing in on a brand name is covering his tracks."
-MarwoodWalks, age 42
?
Um. Ok.
As far as the "giant space monsters" go, that hardly connects two films. Are you suggesting that this is related to Independence Day, Alien, and Monsters vs Aliens? How about Star Trek 2009 which had basically the same Cloverfield monster design
and
was directed by JJ
and
had the letter "e" in the title?
You sure have a curious grasp on logic. -
MarwoodWalks — 9 years ago(July 23, 2016 05:44 AM)
Do you deny the 2 films are linked?
You sure have a curious grasp on logic.
The film makers made them with direct links, they wrote the 10 cloverfield lane as a film with direct links to Cloverfield, they talk about the links openly and also about a third film in the series that will probably be made. so my logic that they are linked is pretty sound don't you think?
If it confuses you that the films didn't have some really dumbass obvious links other than the event of the alien invasion then that's your issue, not the films. The film makers made a film set during the same alien invasion as in the previous film, and tried to make it obvious to morons by putting the word "CLOVERFIELD" in the title. This isn't my opinion, its what the people who made the film say about it.
Do you want to explain my logic issues now? I am only telling you what the people who made the film are telling usisn't that logical?
"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence." -
mugojoe — 9 years ago(July 23, 2016 06:39 AM)
As there is not a single piece of evidence sans the title and the dubious statements of the creators that the films are linked then yes, by logic, I have to presume they are NOT linked and that the creators have made an error in judgment (possibly for financial gain).
Your fallacy is that you presume the premise to be true and can only substantiate it by those who share that opinion. There is no other observable evidence to support the premise.
It's completely, ridiculously, and hilariously illogical, sweetie. -
-
drfunk-18075 — 9 years ago(July 26, 2016 04:18 PM)
You don't even understand logical fallacy yet continue to fail in its application. In case you hadn't noticed this is an open forum. All you have contributed is your lack of understanding of logic in the academic sense.