10 Cloverfield Lane | 3.11.2016 | Walking Dead TV Spot on Page 15 | Tickets on Sale Now!

[goldenstate5]

Even if that is the case, it's so weird that Paramount is apparently willing to flush down a potential franchise like this that they've been sitting on for eight years. Clearly they know people actually still have an affinity for the first one, so why are they even doing this? Wouldn't it be more financially viable to let the 5 mil suspense thriller come out, bomb, and then actually make a true Cloverfield sequel and reap the benefits from that?

[Bishop54]

Looks like the director was busy with designing scenes well after production on the original film ended. If you look at: https://www.instagram.com/p/50ev1ERQ69/ https://www.instagram.com/p/50i3MIxQyX/

[CaptainJackSparrow]

All of Bad Robot's initial teaser trailers seem to only show clips from the beginnings of the movies they are teasing. (Cloverfield, Super 8)

 

(What someone noticed on Reddit)

Edited January 18, 2016 by CaptainJackSparrow

[WrathOfHan]

TFA's teaser: 4 scenes from the first act, 1 scene from the second act, 1 edited scene from the first act, and 1 scene that was cut from the final act.

STID: Primarily the first act, but the final battle is shown at the end (I think the Klingon scene was from the first act but it could be the second act)

[MovieMan89]

13 hours ago, goldenstate5 said:

Even if that is the case, it's so weird that Paramount is apparently willing to flush down a potential franchise like this that they've been sitting on for eight years. Clearly they know people actually still have an affinity for the first one, so why are they even doing this? Wouldn't it be more financially viable to let the 5 mil suspense thriller come out, bomb, and then actually make a true Cloverfield sequel and reap the benefits from that?

I agree, which is why I'm trying to remain optimistic about it despite all the reports suggesting there will just be some shoehorned new footage into an otherwise unrelated film. I think the most promising thing is Abrams willing to have his name all over this. I can't imagine why he would do that if he knows this is all just a dupe and quick cash grab. His name carries so much weight now after TFA, he really shouldn't be damaging his brand so willingly. 

[CJohn]

8 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

I agree, which is why I'm trying to remain optimistic about it despite all the reports suggesting there will just be some shoehorned new footage into an otherwise unrelated film. I think the most promising thing is Abrams willing to have his name all over this. I can't imagine why he would do that if he knows this is all just a dupe and quick cash grab. His name carries so much weight now after TFA, he really shouldn't be damaging his brand so willingly. 

James Cameron's name was all over SANCTUM, just saying  

 

 

[Goffe]

Do GA really remembers the first movie?

 

I doubt, it wasn't even that big back in 2008. Plus this looks dramatically different from the original.

 

All of these "if there's no monster wom will be toxic" are overreactions.

 

[WrathOfHan]

2 minutes ago, Goffe said:

Do GA really remembers the first movie?

 

I doubt, it wasn't even that big back in 2008. Plus this looks dramatically different from the original.

 

All of these "if there's no monster wom will be toxic" are overreactions.

 

Not really. In three weeks after both have come out what will people choose: BVS or this?

[Goffe]

7 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

Not really. In three weeks after both have come out what will people choose: BVS or this?

Hmm not my point but ok.

[harry713]

44 minutes ago, Goffe said:

Do GA really remembers the first movie?

 

I doubt, it wasn't even that big back in 2008. Plus this looks dramatically different from the original.

 

All of these "if there's no monster wom will be toxic" are overreactions.

 

 

Nearly 200m for a horror/monster film in 2008 is pretty big tbh. 

[CJohn]

1 minute ago, harry713 said:

 

Nearly 200m for a horror/monster film in 2008 is pretty big tbh. 

It did 80M, not 200M  

[CaptainJackSparrow]

Just now, CJohn said:

It did 80M, not 200M  

He means WW.

[CJohn]

2 minutes ago, CaptainJackSparrow said:

He means WW.

170M was a good number. Didn't realized he was talking about the WW number.

[Bishop54]

52 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

Not really. In three weeks after both have come out what will people choose: BVS or this?

Who gives a fuck, really. 

[harry713]

6 minutes ago, CJohn said:

170M was a good number. Didn't realized he was talking about the WW number.

 

Whoops yeah sorry meant to specify worldwide. I think domestically it's just about at 100m adjusted. 

 

Ok back to my hole I go. 

[filmlover]

17 minutes ago, harry713 said:

 

Whoops yeah sorry meant to specify worldwide. I think domestically it's just about at 100m adjusted. 

 

Ok back to my hole I go. 

Harry! Can we please chat via PM soon about a possible deal?

Edited January 18, 2016 by filmlover

[CaptainJackSparrow]

Cjohn, Bishop54, here's something to think about: (sorry if already mentioned)

10 is binary for 2....

[CJohn]

7 minutes ago, CaptainJackSparrow said:

Cjohn, Bishop54, here's something to think about: (sorry if already mentioned)

10 is binary for 2....

Did JJ Abrams went that far? He probably did.

[baumer]

Pretty cool trailer.

[Dementeleus]

4 minutes ago, Baumer said:

Pretty cool trailer.

 

It'll be interesting to see if your Goodman/ketchup statement proves true here.