Empire gives Cloverfield five stars here and in its new issue - with the summary "A dazzling experiment that paid off immensely, this is cinematic pleasure at its purest. One caveat: If they ever make a sequel, we’re taking two stars back."

Oh well, three stars is still "good"...

Craig Oxbrow | February 01, 00:32 CET

Hmmm, well I LOVED Cloverfield but am actually highly against the idea of a sequel. I've read the "what if we did this" with the camera thing and scene on the bridge, but actually am incredibly happy with the first one and think a second one would just cheapen the originality and uniqueness of it.

CloudyVisions | February 01, 00:53 CET

Wouldn't a sequel ruin the whole point?

patxshand | February 01, 01:07 CET

I think to make it work, you'd have to go at the sequel like it's not a sequel. Cloverfield was presented as an evidence tape, so I'd have the second taking place in the more or less same time frame, following the government and military's actions to kill the big bad and its brood of little bads. Focusing on the character relationships, naturlich, and the ripple-effect the destruction of NYC has on the country and world. (No more handheld; steadycam and crane shots.)

And I'd end it with the picking-up-the-pieces stage and the discovery of the tape. 'Cause I like callbacks. And it gives it that nice circle of whatsimathingee.

Oh, and there'd have to be a Congressman or similar early on asking if the monster could've been created by terrorists. And a heap of awkwardly silent peons.

...Not that I'd presume to tell Drew how to do it if he's asked to be the writer. Maybe Tim.

Banter | February 01, 01:17 CET

2? No, no, no, we're supposed to get 'Cabin' out of this, aren't we?

thatweirdgirl | February 01, 02:49 CET