Chromatose
Squid pro quo
I was just reading this: http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=41100 interview with the director, and thought this was interesting
"CS: Any possibilities for a "Cloverfield" sequel?
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. "
It's an interesting concept which I hadn't thought of. Although the more they do this the more room there is for error in the sense of having to make sure any scenes that line up between the two sync in both, but then again they skipped a lot of time here and there so they could easily just make up whatever and not have to worry about it for the most part, but I bet it'll get crazily analyzed by movie geeks if they go that route!
And it seems so far the movie has down well enough to warrant backing more films, since it seems it made a record $46 million over the weekend , and it's budget was about half that.
I'd much rather see a continuation than a rehash from a different perspective though.
"CS: Any possibilities for a "Cloverfield" sequel?
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. "
It's an interesting concept which I hadn't thought of. Although the more they do this the more room there is for error in the sense of having to make sure any scenes that line up between the two sync in both, but then again they skipped a lot of time here and there so they could easily just make up whatever and not have to worry about it for the most part, but I bet it'll get crazily analyzed by movie geeks if they go that route!
And it seems so far the movie has down well enough to warrant backing more films, since it seems it made a record $46 million over the weekend , and it's budget was about half that.
I'd much rather see a continuation than a rehash from a different perspective though.
